![]() | 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 75 | ← | Archive 80 | Archive 81 | Archive 82 | Archive 83 | Archive 84 | Archive 85 |
http://www.wwe.com/superstars/wwealumni/kellykelly/ - and...... discuss! Mshake3 ( talk) 20:19, 5 February 2011 (UTC)
Seeing as how the belt design has taken a life of its own outside of wrestling over the years, while it may seem trivial, I think this section could be expanded. [1] Any thoughts?-- Unquestionable Truth-- 02:30, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
I was thinking of changing the WWE NXT section to have all who appeared on NXT, yet haven't been promoted to the main roster. I was of thinking about this:
Ring name | Real name | Notes |
---|---|---|
Brodus Clay | George Murdoch [1] | Appears on
NXT Season 4 Also competes in FCW [2] [3] |
Byron Saxton | Bryan J. Kelly [4] | Appeared on NXT Season 4 Placed 4th Also competes in FCW [5] [6] |
Conor O'Brian | Ryan Parmeter [7] | Appeared on NXT Season 4 Placed 5th Also competes in FCW [8] [9] |
Derrick Bateman | Michael Hutter [10] | Appears on NXT Season 4 Also competes in FCW [11] [12] |
Eli Cottonwood | Kipp Christianson [13] | Appeared on
NXT Season 2 Placed 7th Also competes in FCW [14] [15] |
Jacob Novak | Unknown | Appeared on NXT Season 4 Placed 6th Also competes in FCW [16] [17] |
Johnny Curtis | Jonathan Curtis [18] | Appears on NXT Season 4 Also competes in FCW [19] [20] |
Lucky Cannon | Jon Emminger [21] |
Florida Heavyweight Champion Appeared on NXT Season 2 Placed 6th Also competes in FCW [22] [23] |
Percy Watson | Nick McNeil [24] | Appeared on NXT Season 2 Placed 4th Also competes in FCW [25] [26] |
Titus O'Neill | Thaddeus Bullard [27] |
Florida Tag Team Champion Appeared on NXT Season 2 Placed 8th Also competes in FCW [28] [29] |
I would'nt cos u know they are'nt techinically on the wwe roster just fcw
Ring name | Real name | Notes |
---|---|---|
A.J. | April Jeanette [30] |
FCW Divas Champion Appeared on NXT Season 3 Placed 3rd Also competes in FCW [31] [32] |
Aksana | Živilė Raudonienė [33] |
Queen of FCW Appeared on NXT Season 3 Placed 4th Also competes in FCW [34] [35] |
Maxine | Karlee Pérez [36] | General Manager of FCW Appeared on NXT Season 3 Placed 5th Also competes in FCW [37] [38] |
Naomi | Trinity McCray [39] | Appeared on NXT Season 3 Placed 2nd Also competes in FCW [40] [41] |
What do you think?-- Mikeymike2001 ( talk) 05:39, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
Dividing by shows seems ridiculous to me anyway... its a list of roster/personnel/employees/performers/on-air personalities, show division seems irrelevant. WWE finds the brand extension irrelevant anyway... Maybe to make this more encyclopedic, we should have numerous roster articles based on the year.
2009 World Wrestling Entertainment roster, etc.
Feed
back
☎
21:06, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
I'm not sure how that would work. Could we really source year roster lists? Not against it, but not for it either. Wrestling is different than most sports, so it would be a bit more complicated and I'm not sure if it is allowed.-- Will C 04:35, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
WWE doesn't show when a title is vacated in their title histories. They just skip to the next champion. CM Punk said on Raw that after Orton punted him, he had to forfeit the title. Doesn't that mean it was vacated immediately before Jericho won? Feed back ☎ 15:19, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
... unless some people help me fix the broken links here. I posted this section before, but it was ignored. I don't know if I have to spell it out to the people, but FEATURED ARTICLES WITH BROKEN LINKS ARE NOT FEATURED ARTICLES. Hopefully, they all get fixed in due time. Feed back ☎ 13:55, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
Someone's moved Sheamus' page to King Sheamus, I presume without consensus. Is there someone on WPPW who has moving rights seeing as the old page is taken with a redirect now? Tony2Times ( talk) 22:41, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
Hey! To those who were around when I was active a couple of years ago... nice to see you again! And to those who joined after that... Hi, I used to go by the name of Kalajan, now I'm Deely, and I'm coming back. I was unblocked about three months ago now, and have logged on once or twice, but I've decided I miss Wikipedia, and I'd like to be active once again. Thanks guys, see you around! Deely 1 16:48, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
(Smackdown spoiler here) Ziggler is crowned champion, and we agreed a while ago that this makes him a triple crown champion, but what do we list him as? Dolph Ziggler was never a tag team champion just as Nicky from spirit squad was never a WHC, so do we list him as a triple crown champ under Nick Nemeth or what? 90.198.213.169 ( talk) 14:37, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
Gregory Helms was referenced as a multiple-time Cruiserweight champion even though EVERY SINGLE one of those reigns were in different characters. Recently, Stone Cold was referenced as a former Million Dollar Champion even though he was "The Ringmaster" at the time. How is this any different? Feed back ☎ 21:50, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
Can we please talk about people posting GODDAMN spoilers like the one above, it's plain annoying and it just ruins the point of surprise. Like I'm pretty sure everyone knew Edge was gonna win the match last week had they been watching SportsCenter last Wednesday cause they gave it away. Now I can't do anything about them but we can do something about people like the guy above giving away the damn result 2 days before it airs.-- Voices in my Head WrestleMania XXVII 22:43, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
on the kliq page i edited it to say according to bret harts autobiography: hitman bret was asked to join the group but refused. and guess what they took off my edit saying it was unproven r u kidding me it was in bret hart hitman u know the autobiography released around 07 well tell that to those clue bot jerks come on has anyone read bret hart hitman if so tell them that. i was'nt saying that it was nessisarly proven or true i was saying it as in harts auto biography come on wikipedia get actual people to check our edits!!!!
what do u mean?
I got a question, should we add the Tough Enough contestants on List of World Wrestling Entertainment personnel since they're going to be on "WWE TV"? Are they even classified as employees during their involvement with Tough Enough?-- Mikeymike2001 ( talk) 17:47, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
Just to clear this thing up from watching the broadcast online, basically, Vickie fired Edge, then gave Ziggler the WHC, then Theodore Long came back, and reinstated Edge, and put him in a title match which he won, and edge was announced as the NEW champion, so I think that makes Edge an 11 time champ, and Dolph a 1 time champion. Crisis. E X E 13:48, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
Tell me this Nascar King, Do you read the Edge article every week? Most people don't. Therefore its not ruining anything for most people. If the policy allows spoilers, then they are allowed. There should not on the other hand be week by week updates, that is not allowed. Sephiroth storm ( talk) 07:12, 20 February 2011 (UTC)
To change Bryan Danielson into Daniel Bryan?-- Mikeymike2001 ( talk) 23:31, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
Will most people these days like me had never heard of Bryan Danielson because we don't pay an extra $20 Bucks a month for SHOWTIME. So many Americans (and I'm pretty sure it's mainly Americans who use English Wikipedia) don't know what ROH is because we've never seen it on TV. I also come from the South so I knew about the WWE. Anyone from the US will tell you Daniel Bryan is more well known.-- Voices in my Head WrestleMania XXVII 00:03, 24 February 2011 (UTC)
Hey, folks. I've just semiprotected this article through Wrestlemania (and a bit further) because I've gotten tired of the dimwitsnew contributors posting rumours, speculation, and generally pissing around with it lately. However, it's a real hash as it stands - lots of in-universe stuff and running commentary on storylines, etc. It could really do with some knowledgeable folks with more time than I've got to go through and give it a polish, cut down some of the cruft and generally pretty it up...
Tony Fox
(arf!)
17:35, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
Some IPs think Velocity's coming back on the air on MyNetworkTV, which I've checked and proven that it's not true. I think the page should be protected from these vandals.-- Mikeymike2001 ( talk) 22:13, 27 February 2011 (UTC)
WWEJobber thinks Jacob Novak's real name is his ring-name. He made a reference to this site, but I don't see anything relavent to Novak nor prove his real name. I think he placed a real "Jacob Novak" profile to say it's his real name. Can someone help me on this?-- Mikeymike2001 ( talk) 18:46, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
To whom it may concern. Nergaal ( talk) 22:58, 5 March 2011 (UTC)
Shouldn't have the top conversations been archived by now? I think someone needs to fix that. Feed back ☎ 00:23, 8 March 2011 (UTC)
I've brought this back from the archive section. Since USA has revealed the Tough Enough cast on USA.com, should we add them to the List of World Wrestling Entertainment personnel?-- Mikeymike2001 ( talk) 03:06, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
I haven't spent a whole lot of time lately with PW articles. After looking over a few pages in my watchlist, it's easy to understand why. It appears that the issue of sourcing is being used as an excuse to delete valid information, and also to include dubious information. I've brought this up previously and was likely ignored, but here we go again...
Basically, I went through all the pages, and some talk pages, for this project and related articles on sourcing issues. All I can see is arguments about whether one web site or another is reliable or not. Let me explain briefly explain where I'm coming from. rec.sport.pro-wrestling was in its infancy when I started using the Internet in 1989. In other words, I've been here before the web, much less wrestling websites. When I started reading these websites, I picked up right away on the historical revisionism bent of these sites. Thankfully, there are other sites devoted to accurately chronicling wrestling history. If all you knew about pro wrestling was from reading mainstream wrestling websites, you would believe that pro wrestling was invented by McMahon, Jr. in 1984. That is, unless you're from the Northeast United States, in which case obviously you know that pro wrestling was invented by McMahon, Sr. in 1963.
I hope you realize that I'm being highly facetious, and that you otherwise get my point. Why should I go to the trouble of seeking sources more legitimate than web-based (which tends to approach real work), when apparently, everyone else I see out there is content to take the easy route?
This issue started with me largely over the issue of "billed from" with various wrestlers, and upon digging deeper, graduated to where I notice WWE centrism and American centrism in far too many pages, especially where such a thing doesn't belong. Back to the issue of where a wrestler is billed from, these appear to have been systematically edited to reflect a WWF/E-centric perspective. In other words, if someone was billed from one place in a territory, and another place in the WWF, you're just dismissing the former out of hand. If I were to dig up my stash of 25-30 year old PWIs and start adding information based upon that, would it all be quickly deleted by someone who is of the belief that it's not "reliable" because it isn't a website? I take it most of the people who are reading this work on little else than PW articles. Here's some advice. The best pages on Wikipedia are the best pages for two simple reasons. Their contributors recognize that information exists out there which cannot be accessed by Google, and that there is more to the world out there than just the subject matter being written about. It appears that valid information is also being deleted from wrestling pages because the information is not strictly about pro wrestling, but would otherwise be fine in any other similar page on another subject matter. That's really a whole other issue I don't have the time to go into right now.
Back to the "billed from" issue once more, my current poster child for that would be the Funks. The Double Cross Ranch was Terry's gimmick. Dory had nothing to do with it until he came to the WWF with Terry. All that is listed on Dory's page is "Billed from: The Double Cross Ranch." I hope anyone out there reading realizes that this has the effect of marginalizing his nearly two decades as a main event star, for the only apparent reason being that it didn't occur in the WWF. Similarly, the information in Jesse Barr's page is skewed towards his Jimmy Jack gimmick, nearly to the exclusion of the years and years he spent elsewhere as Jesse Barr, including in main events. There are far too many pages on here which suffer from the same syndrome - someone who was a main eventer in the territories is portrayed here strictly in terms of one promotion they may have appeared in, usually the WWF. RadioKAOS ( talk) 02:55, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
I think I proposed something along these lines before, but I've been looking through the page, and I think the notes section needs improvement. As it is now, most wrestler entries just include major championships. For someone like Flair or Bret Hart, this explains a lot. But, when you have a wrestler like Gorgeous George, Ted DiBiase or Abdullah the Butcher, it becomes much more difficult to explain their influence through the titles they held. So, maybe we should instead expand the notes with an explanation from WWE.com.
For example, for Bullet Bob, the description currently reads "Held several NWA regional championships. Father of four wrestlers: Scott, Brad, Steve and Brian."
But, that could be changed to something like: "In the ring, "Bullet" Bob Armstrong carved out distinction as a tough, working-class hero who would never back down from a fight. [...] The crowds who lined up to watch the grappler in arenas throughout Alabama and Georgia saw something of themselves in Armstrong. He wasn't the biggest man in the ring and he wasn't flashy, but he had tenacity. It was this “never say die” spirit that helped Armstrong persevere when a weightlifting accident nearly disfigured him. Instead of sulking on the sidelines, he pulled on a mask and became "The Bullet." His popularity only grew."
It goes a much longer way in describing why he should be considered a Hall of Famer. Titles can still be included, and could be moved to their own section. I guess the concerns are POV (ie. How do you choose which paragraphs of a page long bio to use) and length, but I think implementing this would improve the page. -- Scorpion 0422 01:36, 22 March 2011 (UTC)
I'm sorry, I was under the impression that I was at wikipedia asking for opinions from fellow editors. It turns out I posted my question at a wrestling forum. Next time I won't bother asking here (and then some jerk will revert me for not having "project consensus"). -- Scorpion 0422 20:10, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
The "___, ____ and ____ were inducted" argument as to why the Hall of Fame doesn't mean anything is pretty weak. If you focus only on the worst ten inuctees, then you can make any Hall of Fame seem illegitimate. The fact is that about 80% of the current inductees are pretty deserving of the honour. As for the "___, ____ and ____ weren't inducted" argument, you have to remember that with this Hall of Fame, inductee co-operation is a requirement. I can't explain the Freebirds not being in (with WM in Atlanta, I thought this would be their year), but Bob Backlund and Bruno Sammartino have previously turned down induction. As have others like The Ultimate Warrior and Honky Tonk Man. With some, notably Randy Savage and Owen Hart, there are other issues keeping them out of the hall.
But all that is beside the point, as even if it is just a marketing ploy with no real value, that's still not a reason not to make certain changes. I agree with Gary about "POV peacock terms", which is what a lot of the WWE.com bios are. I wish they had a section where they gave very brief descriptions of their career highlights, but they don't. I guess we just have to continue addressing the descriptions on a case by case basis, and fill-in for some (like Gorgeous George) where required. -- Scorpion 0422 23:11, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
Reading all the comments this sounds more of a blog discussion now. Feedback's comment about picking someone at random seems to have made this blog like. I could be wrong but that's what it seems like.-- Voices in my Head WrestleMania XXVII 23:26, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
I was wondering, since Wade Barrett won the WWE Intercontinental Championship this week and The Corre appears on both Raw and SmackDown due to Justin Gabriel and Heath Slater holding the WWE Tag Team Championship, does holding the tag titles and winning a singles title make the singles title dual-branded as well?-- Mikeymike2001 ( talk) 23:50, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
If you haven't noticed, WWE.com has had its most drastic redesign in years. As far as I know, it looks like the majority of the pages are still around but some of them have clearly moved, so it will definetly affect our current sourcing a bit. I'll have a check and see what's been moved to let you guys know. So far:
-- Θaks ter 16:09, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
WWE.com has launched a WCW section on their website. I was wondering, by WWE doing this and putting WCW on the SmackDown vs. Raw video games mean that WWE is reviving WCW as the new third brand?-- Mikeymike2001 ( talk) 21:23, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
Something needs to be done so that these two articles are in synch. Holly's page has him listed as having one reign as Intercontinental Champion, however he is not included in Wikipedia's List of WWE Intercontinental Champions. Now to me, this is a very simple issue: one of the pages needs to be fixed. So I sought to correct this in Holly's page by removing his reign, however it was reverted back to say that he was champion. So then I tried to correct the List of Intercontinental Champions so as to include Holly's reign, however this was reverted back to say he does not have a reign (and has been reverted multiple times when someone tries to add Holly in). Now call me crazy (just using it as a figure of speech, please no one post a simple 'You're crazy' response), but this seems to be a glaring contradiction that tarnishes the credability of both pages, and to an extent Wikipedia itself, to have one page say "Yes, Holly had a reign" and the other to say "No, Holly did not have a reign," and for both to be considered accurate. Granted, Holly's page does say the reign is unofficial, however every other 'List of (insert) Championship' page has unofficial reigns listed. Personally I feel his reign should not be counted, as there are numerous other instances where wrestlers have pinned champions in controversial fashion, been declared champion, and then the title was vacated as a result, and those wresltes are not listed as having reigns. But I have grown tired of trying to edit (and re-edit) the pages myself, so I'm going to appeal to those here on the project page as to what action should be taken so that those two pages are not giving contradictory informantion. 76.29.164.90 ( talk) 03:51, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
Just wondering, what's the recent colouring in of navbox templates? I'm not entirely against the use of it, as protesting against it probably goes too much into WP:DEW territory. But if we're going along with it, I would like to warn about WP:COLOR and using too much bright colours that might cause accessibility problems. The amount of bright red/black I'm seeing recently is a little too unbearable. -- Θaks ter 18:50, 5 April 2011 (UTC)
This is off topic, does anyone know how Calloway is doing after WM? Any legit injuries? If all of it was a work, they sure as hell did a good job selling it. Except for that idiot ref telling Hunter to back off after he fell outside the ring... Sephiroth storm ( talk) 02:19, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
Since it's starting to heat up over at the related article (albeit with bad sourcing), I might as well give a heads up here. It might very well be the case that World Wrestling Entertainment is pulling a KFC and renaming themselves simply as "WWE". A comparison of their corporate site from last May to today seems to say it all. However, with no official press statement like the WWF/WWE change in 2002, I'm not entirely sure how to approach this at the moment.
I'm also assuming if this move is official, we'll take the approach we've always done in the articles and not resort to revisionism (i.e. pre-2002 is World Wrestling Federation (WWF), 2002-2011 is World Wrestling Entertainment (WWE), post-2011 is simply WWE). -- Θaks ter 22:23, 3 April 2011 (UTC)
The beginning of the opening article in this weeks Wrestling Observer:
"There was a meeting this past week at Titan Towers where the decision was finalized by Vince McMahon, although it had been pretty much expected for some time, that World Wrestling Entertainment is no more.
The company formerly known as World Wrestling Entertainment, Inc., is now WWE Inc. and the initials no longer stand for anything. It's basically a continuation of trying to eliminate the words "wrestling" and "wrestler" from the vocabulary thinking it is holding the company back.
The company sent out its annual report this week listing its name as "The New WWE," and on the front page it says, "The launch of a WWE Network is an example of one transformative change in our sights. Further exemplifying this paradigm shift, we are changing our branding from World Wrestling Entertainment to WWE and moving beyond our wrestling heritage. We believe The New WWE will ultimately generate meaningful earnings growth and support greater returns to you, our shareholders." 75.146.53.33 ( talk) 00:21, 7 April 2011 (UTC)
Why is everyone talking about some pointless name change that'll probably only affect the stock market when the WrestleMania XXVII page is starting to get out of control. From people adding unnessassary info to removing references & entire sections. Voices in my Head WrestleMania XXVII 15:08, 7 April 2011 (UTC)--
It's official: http://corporate.wwe.com/news/2011/2011_04_07.html 138.163.106.71 ( talk) 15:53, 7 April 2011 (UTC)
I think people are going a little crazy with this whole updating for the name change thing. What's the point of moving templates and creating a bunch of redirects? -- Scorpion 0422 23:26, 10 April 2011 (UTC)
There are two issues I have found regarding the ECW section of the Triple Crown Championship page. The first being that the lead section states that "National promotions that officially recognize Triple Crown winners include World Wrestling Entertainment, Total Nonstop Action Wrestling, Ring of Honor, and the defunct Extreme Championship Wrestling." I believe that ECW should be removed from this list, as the original company did not recognize any such accolade. It was not until years after the company shut down and filed bankruptcy, and WWE subsequently purchased all of it's assets, including the championships, that recognition came to an ECW TC (February 27, 2006 according to the source given). The ECW promotion no longer existed; WWE was the controlling promotion.
And the second issue is the source itself. The only reference to an ECW TC is from Matthew Cardona calling Mikey Whipwreck the ECW Triple Crown Champion. To me this does not seem like a very reliable source to be using as justification for creating an ECW TC. Granted WWE.com allowed the material to be published on their website, however it was not them directly saying so, they essentially just put up what Cardona stated. There have been several instances where a person saying they achieved something (Miz stating he is a Grand Slam Champion, JBL stating he was a GSC before he won the IC), and those have not been allowed into articles. So a person with no control over the matter saying that someone else is a TCC does not seem to have much credability to it. Thoughts? 76.29.164.90 ( talk) 06:58, 8 April 2011 (UTC)
(Tangent) If we're going to include ROH, then what about Samoa Joe? He was (albeit briefly) part of the Prophecy when they were tag champs, and defended it with them in a 6 man tag when they were using the freebird rule. 92.12.18.17 ( talk) 12:44, 10 April 2011 (UTC)
how about WCW i have the table and here is a link if its reliable and everyone else agrees ill add it http://www.angelfire.com/ny2/RayNRon/misc/interesting.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by Black60dragon ( talk • contribs) 01:38, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
Apparently, he signed a new Legends Contract. So is he worthy of personnel or not. Either he is not there or I didn't look very well. ( UnreliableBeing ( talk) 07:06, 11 April 2011 (UTC))
Hello, anyone here? -- UnreliableBeing ( talk) 15:32, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
I know that both Brie and Nikki Bella's histories in WWE are the same, but should we make separate pages for Brie and Nikki now since Brie won the WWE Divas Championship?-- Mikeymike2001 ( talk) 22:36, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
I dont think so. their history is still the same right now and probably will stay that way, too early to tell Wrestling0101 ( talk) 23:18, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
did there used to be a brie bella page before because she debuted a year or so before her sister did-- Black60dragon ( talk) 00:31, 15 April 2011 (UTC)
They need to be renamed from World Wrestling Entertainment to WWE Wrestling0101 ( talk) 05:21, 17 April 2011 (UTC)
He has used that nickname before his match with the king(just before) on an interview on WWE.com Swagger called him mr wrestlemania and that was right after the match. All Raw Cole called him self mr wrestlemania and the smackdown after him and swagger reffered to cole as the new mr wrestlemania. I have tryed putting it on his nickname section because its got everythig required to be a nickname in wrestling but some ppl who are not NPOV keep reverting itin the edit summary there resions have been NO NEVER or SHAWN MICHEALS IS MR WRESTLEMANIA thats if they give reasions. The shawn micheals thing isnt a resion not to as I pointed out to that person Buddy Rodgers and Ric Flair are both the Nature Boy(WHOO!). Its obvious they take offence to wwe calling cole mr wresltemania but who the hell cares!! wiki is npov so there pov doesnt matter at all! there usless. pls would you step in and make it officeal that it should stay that way or summit. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.222.227.22 ( talk) 21:42, 10 April 2011 (UTC)
God I swear sometimes people on here bring up the dumbest questions. Seriously who honestly cares that a tool like Michael Cole is trying to being like Shawn Michaels (which will never happen). BTW do any of you guys even have a life off wikipedia?-- Voices in my Head WWE 22:53, 11 April 2011 (UTC)
So your just going to be rude then and insult me? Nice I'm beginning to lose faith in the education system in America because of manners like these.
And another thing, some people on here really are starting to take this stuff too seriously. Like a frickin religion. Last time I checked this page was to talk on improving articles not to debate on stupid dumbass questions like if a tool like Michael Cole (and FYI he was already an ass before he went heel) if he's the NEW Mr. WrestleMania. While I'd say short answer hell no just get off the computer and go to a bar or something people.-- Voices in my Head WWE 00:49, 12 April 2011 (UTC)
Wow. That's all I can say after reading this discussion. You talk about taking wikipedia too seriously, yet you completely jump over an unregistered user who is clearly unfamiliar with policy. Whether these users "have lives" or not has absolutely nothing to do with discussion. It's that kind of hostile attitude that has given WP:PW a bad reputation. -- Scorpion 0422 22:02, 12 April 2011 (UTC)
This conversation is stupid. It would have been much easier to give a simple answer to the original question. This conversation should end now. GaryColemanFan ( talk) 05:40, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
Hey if any of you guys haven't noticed by now, Over the Limit (2011) is, for some reason, up for deletion. Even though the event is a month and a half away and tickets are on sale at both Ticketmaster.com and at KeyArena's website.-- Voices in my Head WWE 20:27, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
FYI, User:62.255.132.174 keeps changing mentions of the World Wrestling Federation/WWF to World Wrestling Entertainment/WWE. I've made note of it on the user's talk page, but the user blanked the page. -- Jtalledo (talk) 13:25, 19 April 2011 (UTC)
Greetings. The project's input is needed here. An editor is trying to push a color change on this template, and I am not the only one to oppose it. However, more eyes on this would be helpful to gain a consensus as to whether to change the colors or not. ArcAngel (talk) ) 19:16, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
“ | In general, styles for tables and other block-level elements should be set using CSS classes, not with inline style attributes. This is because the site-wide CSS is more carefully tested to ensure compatibility with a wide range of browsers; it also creates a greater degree of professionalism by ensuring a consistent appearance between articles. Deviations from standard conventions are acceptable where they create a semantic distinction ... | ” |
|basestyle=
, |groupstyle=
, |titlestyle=
, ... in the navigation box, we are using "inline style attributes" which are overriding the "CSS classes" set by
MediaWiki:Common.css. There are exceptions for cases where deviations create a "semantic distinction". However, in this case, there is no semantic distinction, but purely decorative. The comments about Coke, Pepsi, ... is basically
WP:OTHERSTUFF in my opinion, and not what is being discussed here. I can certainly drop a note at
WT:Accessibility to invite wider opinion. Thanks!
Plastikspork
―Œ(talk)
03:02, 25 April 2011 (UTC)Sheesh! What began as just a little bit of innocent and decorative sprucing up, turns into freaking WWIII! You know what...screw it, I give up! I've seen less outrage at war protests than I'm seeing here over COLORING THE HEADER ON A STUPID FREAKING TEMPLATE! Mind if I breathe, or will that somehow offend somebody as well? Vjmlhds 11:37, 25 April 2011 (UTC)
I agree with Gary. [3] This is EXACTLY what I was talking about with the Michael Cole discussion. People bring up the dumbest, most pointless topics on here. I'm really starting to think there aren't any people on here who have a life outside of Wikipedia.-- Voices in my Head WWE 16:11, 25 April 2011 (UTC)
So in that case, are we all pretty much in agreement that the default should stay? Crisis. E X E 20:14, 25 April 2011 (UTC)
If anyone hasn't noticed by now, Over the Limit (2011) is for some reason up for deletion even though the event is confirmed by WWE to be taking place, tickets are on sale on both Ticketmaster.com and KeyArena's web page. Has future notability ever been a reason to delete a pay-per-view article that will be happening and even if it's deleted someone will probably just start it back up?-- Voices in my Head WWE 17:19, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
http://realwrestlecrap.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=WWE&action=display&thread=362335
my sincere apologies on behalf of my fellow forum members. Crisis. E X E 16:57, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
An article for them has been created (again), I don't really follow wrestling week-by-week, I just have a vague idea of what's going on, so I don't know if they're notable enough now to keep. The article is blank at the moment anyway, I just thought I'd offer it to the masses since it's lasted a week or so without being deleted this time. BulbaThor ( talk) 09:28, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
We could do with another person or two watching Ryder's article. His swelling fan following is leading to lots of repetitive vandalism about him being Internet Champion (a fictional title he gave himself for being so over online), I dunno if this is enough to have him protected or not but I thought I should mention it if anyone can put him on a watch list. Tony2Times ( talk) 22:29, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
Jeff Jarrett's twitter page says the following: "Impact...it's now Impact Wrestling. RT @SeanWWETNAfan: @JeffJarrettTNA has TNA been renamed or only impact?". Should "Total Nonstop Action Wrestling" be moved to "Impact Wrestling"? -- BOD will be your end of days! ۞ 17:24, 6 May 2011 (UTC)
On the Kamala (wrestler) article, someone added a link today to a Spanish version of the article. The Spanish version has much of the same information, but it's titled "James Simons (luchador))". Clearly, this is not the same wrestler. Does anyone here edit on the Spanish Wikipedia and have the ability to fix that? GaryColemanFan ( talk) 05:13, 8 May 2011 (UTC)
it almost 2 weeks to it, there are 2 matches confirmed in it, but still no official page... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mountain3333 ( talk • contribs) 17:12, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
The IP makes a good point. I've left two messages on King of Hearts (whose an Admin) talk page yet he's still not responded. We need an Admin to move the page back to live article again. If any of you guys know an admin who'll respond to a talk page message faster than 24 hours can you please contact him/her and ask that person if they can do what I'm leaving a message here about.-- Voices in my Head WWE 01:00, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
So we're just gonna keep it in incubation past the day of the event.-- Voices in my Head WWE 02:37, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
Aside from the low quality poster this article is ready to move out of incubation. Does anyone know an admin who'll do the job and who'll respond in less than 24 hours because King of Hearts isn't responding at all.-- Voices in my Head WWE 17:11, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
King of Hearts decided to leave the article in incubation till the day of the event (9 days from now). But the article itself looks like (and pardon me for saying this) a bunch of SHIT.-- Voices in my Head WWE 01:37, 14 May 2011 (UTC)
Specificially in regards to Dick Murdoch: are you ribbin' me that the content about his appearance at a Royal Rumble is nearly equal to the content about his tag team with Dusty Rhodes? That's just in number of bytes. The Royal Rumble mention appears to offer more details. All I can say is "Wow." RadioKAOS ( talk) 11:02, 11 May 2011 (UTC)
I see Jack Veneno listed there. Once again, this must be the anti-book bias I was talking about. Do you mean to tell me that no one here besides myself has read To Be the Man? Not only will you find references, but perhaps information which is contrary to what's currently on the page. I've already made it perfectly clear that my copy is in storage, otherwise I'd be happy to help. Speaking of To Be the Man and references, I already pointed out this book as a source for Charles Robinson when it was nominated for deletion. I see no one has taken the bait there, either. RadioKAOS ( talk) 11:15, 11 May 2011 (UTC)
I know this is already being discussed on the article's talk page and WP:RM soon enough, but I'm just a bit bugged that the actual TNA promotion article was moved to "TNA Impact Wrestling" when only the show has been rebranded. May I please have a response to reverting the article back to its original name? I've tried moving it myself, but the article name is already taken as a redirect. Please tell me what the verdict should be. Thank you. -- SAVIOR_ SELF .777 03:25, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
Promotion = TNA
TV Show = Impact Wrestling
Vjmlhds 04:03, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
I Neeed moderator/administrator approval of moving the article back to its original page. A regular user can't do so. -- SAVIOR_ SELF .777 04:26, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
Vjmlhds You are correct I just spoke with a TNA executive via twitter http://twitter.com/#!/DavidSahadi/status/69137336469950464 The Promotion is TNA and the Show is Impact Wrestling Zanwifi ( talk) 22:06, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
The Nexus (professional wrestling) is an article about The Corre. It's very week-by-week, and parts of it are very poorly written. Also all the references but one for the article are in the 'In wrestling' section with finishing moves and themes and so on. Last time an article was created it was deleted (like the rest of them) but there seemed to be no clear agreement on if they were/are notable enough to have their own article. I'm not sure how to nominate an article for deletion, or I would do to get a consensus, can anybody help? BulbaThor ( talk) 13:06, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
while this is sad news,just letting you know that you might all want to watchlist his article for the next week or so. Crisis. E X E 17:24, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
There was a suggestion to post Savage's death on the in the news section, and it was posted briefly, but was soon pulled mainly for two reasons. 1) Notability (although given the amount of media coverage his death received, I'd say it was worthy) and 2) many users could not see past the fact that wrestling is "fake". So, they were quite critical of it detailing his career from a mostly "in-universe" style, with one user taking offense to calling Savage a World Champion. I don't think the quality should matter, since the ITN section has linked to stubs in the past (especially with some of the deaths). It's a shame that some users couldn't look past their own dislike for pro wrestling, especially since just about every mainstream news site deemed Savage's death as being front page material. -- Scorpion 0422 00:43, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
Mike McCurley (June 12, 1984) Is A Third Generation American Professional Wrestler Both His Great Uncle And Grandfather Were Great Wrestlers In The National Wrestling Alliance. In Jan 18, 2010 He Went On To Capture The NWA Mid-South World Tag Team Championships. Following In There Footsteps He Went On To Wrestle In Over 20 Matches Throughout Oklahoma, Kansas, Arkansas And Texas. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Okmastaman03:06, May 27, 2011 ( talk • contribs)
Several IPs and RajGandhi2 ( talk · contribs) are making unsourced edits to Christian (wrestler) and articles surrounding the WWE Championship, claiming that Christian won (past tense) the championship on the June 6 episode of WWE Raw. It is currently June 3 in my time zone, so unless these people are time travelers this is a major violation of WP:CRYSTAL. I've tried requesting semi for the affected pages and rolling back the edits, but could use some help identifying anything I may have missed. Thanks. — KuyaBriBri Talk 19:45, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
Anyone want to add info on the Chyna article regarding her latest endeavor? Truthfully, I was reluctant to believe it, but several sources are claiming the movie will be released this month, and they claim she is now, no longer claiming she did not make the film, in fact at least one source is claiming she intends to so more. Not to mention that vivid has released screenshots from the film. Sephiroth storm ( talk) 16:59, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
If any of you have been living under a rock for the last week or so WWE Capitol Punishment has been put up for AFD AGAIN by Chzz for his usual reason NO RELIABLE THIRD PARTY SOURCES even though they're all a bunch of Dirtsheet's. Y'all are more than welcome to help out with the article and the AFD.-- Voices in my Head WWE 04:46, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
Y'all can deal with Chzz and this AFD. I'm done fighting with him. Arguing with him is like arguing with a brick wall there's no point.-- Voices in my Head WWE 23:23, 9 June 2011 (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 75 | ← | Archive 80 | Archive 81 | Archive 82 | Archive 83 | Archive 84 | Archive 85 |
http://www.wwe.com/superstars/wwealumni/kellykelly/ - and...... discuss! Mshake3 ( talk) 20:19, 5 February 2011 (UTC)
Seeing as how the belt design has taken a life of its own outside of wrestling over the years, while it may seem trivial, I think this section could be expanded. [1] Any thoughts?-- Unquestionable Truth-- 02:30, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
I was thinking of changing the WWE NXT section to have all who appeared on NXT, yet haven't been promoted to the main roster. I was of thinking about this:
Ring name | Real name | Notes |
---|---|---|
Brodus Clay | George Murdoch [1] | Appears on
NXT Season 4 Also competes in FCW [2] [3] |
Byron Saxton | Bryan J. Kelly [4] | Appeared on NXT Season 4 Placed 4th Also competes in FCW [5] [6] |
Conor O'Brian | Ryan Parmeter [7] | Appeared on NXT Season 4 Placed 5th Also competes in FCW [8] [9] |
Derrick Bateman | Michael Hutter [10] | Appears on NXT Season 4 Also competes in FCW [11] [12] |
Eli Cottonwood | Kipp Christianson [13] | Appeared on
NXT Season 2 Placed 7th Also competes in FCW [14] [15] |
Jacob Novak | Unknown | Appeared on NXT Season 4 Placed 6th Also competes in FCW [16] [17] |
Johnny Curtis | Jonathan Curtis [18] | Appears on NXT Season 4 Also competes in FCW [19] [20] |
Lucky Cannon | Jon Emminger [21] |
Florida Heavyweight Champion Appeared on NXT Season 2 Placed 6th Also competes in FCW [22] [23] |
Percy Watson | Nick McNeil [24] | Appeared on NXT Season 2 Placed 4th Also competes in FCW [25] [26] |
Titus O'Neill | Thaddeus Bullard [27] |
Florida Tag Team Champion Appeared on NXT Season 2 Placed 8th Also competes in FCW [28] [29] |
I would'nt cos u know they are'nt techinically on the wwe roster just fcw
Ring name | Real name | Notes |
---|---|---|
A.J. | April Jeanette [30] |
FCW Divas Champion Appeared on NXT Season 3 Placed 3rd Also competes in FCW [31] [32] |
Aksana | Živilė Raudonienė [33] |
Queen of FCW Appeared on NXT Season 3 Placed 4th Also competes in FCW [34] [35] |
Maxine | Karlee Pérez [36] | General Manager of FCW Appeared on NXT Season 3 Placed 5th Also competes in FCW [37] [38] |
Naomi | Trinity McCray [39] | Appeared on NXT Season 3 Placed 2nd Also competes in FCW [40] [41] |
What do you think?-- Mikeymike2001 ( talk) 05:39, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
Dividing by shows seems ridiculous to me anyway... its a list of roster/personnel/employees/performers/on-air personalities, show division seems irrelevant. WWE finds the brand extension irrelevant anyway... Maybe to make this more encyclopedic, we should have numerous roster articles based on the year.
2009 World Wrestling Entertainment roster, etc.
Feed
back
☎
21:06, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
I'm not sure how that would work. Could we really source year roster lists? Not against it, but not for it either. Wrestling is different than most sports, so it would be a bit more complicated and I'm not sure if it is allowed.-- Will C 04:35, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
WWE doesn't show when a title is vacated in their title histories. They just skip to the next champion. CM Punk said on Raw that after Orton punted him, he had to forfeit the title. Doesn't that mean it was vacated immediately before Jericho won? Feed back ☎ 15:19, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
... unless some people help me fix the broken links here. I posted this section before, but it was ignored. I don't know if I have to spell it out to the people, but FEATURED ARTICLES WITH BROKEN LINKS ARE NOT FEATURED ARTICLES. Hopefully, they all get fixed in due time. Feed back ☎ 13:55, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
Someone's moved Sheamus' page to King Sheamus, I presume without consensus. Is there someone on WPPW who has moving rights seeing as the old page is taken with a redirect now? Tony2Times ( talk) 22:41, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
Hey! To those who were around when I was active a couple of years ago... nice to see you again! And to those who joined after that... Hi, I used to go by the name of Kalajan, now I'm Deely, and I'm coming back. I was unblocked about three months ago now, and have logged on once or twice, but I've decided I miss Wikipedia, and I'd like to be active once again. Thanks guys, see you around! Deely 1 16:48, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
(Smackdown spoiler here) Ziggler is crowned champion, and we agreed a while ago that this makes him a triple crown champion, but what do we list him as? Dolph Ziggler was never a tag team champion just as Nicky from spirit squad was never a WHC, so do we list him as a triple crown champ under Nick Nemeth or what? 90.198.213.169 ( talk) 14:37, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
Gregory Helms was referenced as a multiple-time Cruiserweight champion even though EVERY SINGLE one of those reigns were in different characters. Recently, Stone Cold was referenced as a former Million Dollar Champion even though he was "The Ringmaster" at the time. How is this any different? Feed back ☎ 21:50, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
Can we please talk about people posting GODDAMN spoilers like the one above, it's plain annoying and it just ruins the point of surprise. Like I'm pretty sure everyone knew Edge was gonna win the match last week had they been watching SportsCenter last Wednesday cause they gave it away. Now I can't do anything about them but we can do something about people like the guy above giving away the damn result 2 days before it airs.-- Voices in my Head WrestleMania XXVII 22:43, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
on the kliq page i edited it to say according to bret harts autobiography: hitman bret was asked to join the group but refused. and guess what they took off my edit saying it was unproven r u kidding me it was in bret hart hitman u know the autobiography released around 07 well tell that to those clue bot jerks come on has anyone read bret hart hitman if so tell them that. i was'nt saying that it was nessisarly proven or true i was saying it as in harts auto biography come on wikipedia get actual people to check our edits!!!!
what do u mean?
I got a question, should we add the Tough Enough contestants on List of World Wrestling Entertainment personnel since they're going to be on "WWE TV"? Are they even classified as employees during their involvement with Tough Enough?-- Mikeymike2001 ( talk) 17:47, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
Just to clear this thing up from watching the broadcast online, basically, Vickie fired Edge, then gave Ziggler the WHC, then Theodore Long came back, and reinstated Edge, and put him in a title match which he won, and edge was announced as the NEW champion, so I think that makes Edge an 11 time champ, and Dolph a 1 time champion. Crisis. E X E 13:48, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
Tell me this Nascar King, Do you read the Edge article every week? Most people don't. Therefore its not ruining anything for most people. If the policy allows spoilers, then they are allowed. There should not on the other hand be week by week updates, that is not allowed. Sephiroth storm ( talk) 07:12, 20 February 2011 (UTC)
To change Bryan Danielson into Daniel Bryan?-- Mikeymike2001 ( talk) 23:31, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
Will most people these days like me had never heard of Bryan Danielson because we don't pay an extra $20 Bucks a month for SHOWTIME. So many Americans (and I'm pretty sure it's mainly Americans who use English Wikipedia) don't know what ROH is because we've never seen it on TV. I also come from the South so I knew about the WWE. Anyone from the US will tell you Daniel Bryan is more well known.-- Voices in my Head WrestleMania XXVII 00:03, 24 February 2011 (UTC)
Hey, folks. I've just semiprotected this article through Wrestlemania (and a bit further) because I've gotten tired of the dimwitsnew contributors posting rumours, speculation, and generally pissing around with it lately. However, it's a real hash as it stands - lots of in-universe stuff and running commentary on storylines, etc. It could really do with some knowledgeable folks with more time than I've got to go through and give it a polish, cut down some of the cruft and generally pretty it up...
Tony Fox
(arf!)
17:35, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
Some IPs think Velocity's coming back on the air on MyNetworkTV, which I've checked and proven that it's not true. I think the page should be protected from these vandals.-- Mikeymike2001 ( talk) 22:13, 27 February 2011 (UTC)
WWEJobber thinks Jacob Novak's real name is his ring-name. He made a reference to this site, but I don't see anything relavent to Novak nor prove his real name. I think he placed a real "Jacob Novak" profile to say it's his real name. Can someone help me on this?-- Mikeymike2001 ( talk) 18:46, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
To whom it may concern. Nergaal ( talk) 22:58, 5 March 2011 (UTC)
Shouldn't have the top conversations been archived by now? I think someone needs to fix that. Feed back ☎ 00:23, 8 March 2011 (UTC)
I've brought this back from the archive section. Since USA has revealed the Tough Enough cast on USA.com, should we add them to the List of World Wrestling Entertainment personnel?-- Mikeymike2001 ( talk) 03:06, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
I haven't spent a whole lot of time lately with PW articles. After looking over a few pages in my watchlist, it's easy to understand why. It appears that the issue of sourcing is being used as an excuse to delete valid information, and also to include dubious information. I've brought this up previously and was likely ignored, but here we go again...
Basically, I went through all the pages, and some talk pages, for this project and related articles on sourcing issues. All I can see is arguments about whether one web site or another is reliable or not. Let me explain briefly explain where I'm coming from. rec.sport.pro-wrestling was in its infancy when I started using the Internet in 1989. In other words, I've been here before the web, much less wrestling websites. When I started reading these websites, I picked up right away on the historical revisionism bent of these sites. Thankfully, there are other sites devoted to accurately chronicling wrestling history. If all you knew about pro wrestling was from reading mainstream wrestling websites, you would believe that pro wrestling was invented by McMahon, Jr. in 1984. That is, unless you're from the Northeast United States, in which case obviously you know that pro wrestling was invented by McMahon, Sr. in 1963.
I hope you realize that I'm being highly facetious, and that you otherwise get my point. Why should I go to the trouble of seeking sources more legitimate than web-based (which tends to approach real work), when apparently, everyone else I see out there is content to take the easy route?
This issue started with me largely over the issue of "billed from" with various wrestlers, and upon digging deeper, graduated to where I notice WWE centrism and American centrism in far too many pages, especially where such a thing doesn't belong. Back to the issue of where a wrestler is billed from, these appear to have been systematically edited to reflect a WWF/E-centric perspective. In other words, if someone was billed from one place in a territory, and another place in the WWF, you're just dismissing the former out of hand. If I were to dig up my stash of 25-30 year old PWIs and start adding information based upon that, would it all be quickly deleted by someone who is of the belief that it's not "reliable" because it isn't a website? I take it most of the people who are reading this work on little else than PW articles. Here's some advice. The best pages on Wikipedia are the best pages for two simple reasons. Their contributors recognize that information exists out there which cannot be accessed by Google, and that there is more to the world out there than just the subject matter being written about. It appears that valid information is also being deleted from wrestling pages because the information is not strictly about pro wrestling, but would otherwise be fine in any other similar page on another subject matter. That's really a whole other issue I don't have the time to go into right now.
Back to the "billed from" issue once more, my current poster child for that would be the Funks. The Double Cross Ranch was Terry's gimmick. Dory had nothing to do with it until he came to the WWF with Terry. All that is listed on Dory's page is "Billed from: The Double Cross Ranch." I hope anyone out there reading realizes that this has the effect of marginalizing his nearly two decades as a main event star, for the only apparent reason being that it didn't occur in the WWF. Similarly, the information in Jesse Barr's page is skewed towards his Jimmy Jack gimmick, nearly to the exclusion of the years and years he spent elsewhere as Jesse Barr, including in main events. There are far too many pages on here which suffer from the same syndrome - someone who was a main eventer in the territories is portrayed here strictly in terms of one promotion they may have appeared in, usually the WWF. RadioKAOS ( talk) 02:55, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
I think I proposed something along these lines before, but I've been looking through the page, and I think the notes section needs improvement. As it is now, most wrestler entries just include major championships. For someone like Flair or Bret Hart, this explains a lot. But, when you have a wrestler like Gorgeous George, Ted DiBiase or Abdullah the Butcher, it becomes much more difficult to explain their influence through the titles they held. So, maybe we should instead expand the notes with an explanation from WWE.com.
For example, for Bullet Bob, the description currently reads "Held several NWA regional championships. Father of four wrestlers: Scott, Brad, Steve and Brian."
But, that could be changed to something like: "In the ring, "Bullet" Bob Armstrong carved out distinction as a tough, working-class hero who would never back down from a fight. [...] The crowds who lined up to watch the grappler in arenas throughout Alabama and Georgia saw something of themselves in Armstrong. He wasn't the biggest man in the ring and he wasn't flashy, but he had tenacity. It was this “never say die” spirit that helped Armstrong persevere when a weightlifting accident nearly disfigured him. Instead of sulking on the sidelines, he pulled on a mask and became "The Bullet." His popularity only grew."
It goes a much longer way in describing why he should be considered a Hall of Famer. Titles can still be included, and could be moved to their own section. I guess the concerns are POV (ie. How do you choose which paragraphs of a page long bio to use) and length, but I think implementing this would improve the page. -- Scorpion 0422 01:36, 22 March 2011 (UTC)
I'm sorry, I was under the impression that I was at wikipedia asking for opinions from fellow editors. It turns out I posted my question at a wrestling forum. Next time I won't bother asking here (and then some jerk will revert me for not having "project consensus"). -- Scorpion 0422 20:10, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
The "___, ____ and ____ were inducted" argument as to why the Hall of Fame doesn't mean anything is pretty weak. If you focus only on the worst ten inuctees, then you can make any Hall of Fame seem illegitimate. The fact is that about 80% of the current inductees are pretty deserving of the honour. As for the "___, ____ and ____ weren't inducted" argument, you have to remember that with this Hall of Fame, inductee co-operation is a requirement. I can't explain the Freebirds not being in (with WM in Atlanta, I thought this would be their year), but Bob Backlund and Bruno Sammartino have previously turned down induction. As have others like The Ultimate Warrior and Honky Tonk Man. With some, notably Randy Savage and Owen Hart, there are other issues keeping them out of the hall.
But all that is beside the point, as even if it is just a marketing ploy with no real value, that's still not a reason not to make certain changes. I agree with Gary about "POV peacock terms", which is what a lot of the WWE.com bios are. I wish they had a section where they gave very brief descriptions of their career highlights, but they don't. I guess we just have to continue addressing the descriptions on a case by case basis, and fill-in for some (like Gorgeous George) where required. -- Scorpion 0422 23:11, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
Reading all the comments this sounds more of a blog discussion now. Feedback's comment about picking someone at random seems to have made this blog like. I could be wrong but that's what it seems like.-- Voices in my Head WrestleMania XXVII 23:26, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
I was wondering, since Wade Barrett won the WWE Intercontinental Championship this week and The Corre appears on both Raw and SmackDown due to Justin Gabriel and Heath Slater holding the WWE Tag Team Championship, does holding the tag titles and winning a singles title make the singles title dual-branded as well?-- Mikeymike2001 ( talk) 23:50, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
If you haven't noticed, WWE.com has had its most drastic redesign in years. As far as I know, it looks like the majority of the pages are still around but some of them have clearly moved, so it will definetly affect our current sourcing a bit. I'll have a check and see what's been moved to let you guys know. So far:
-- Θaks ter 16:09, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
WWE.com has launched a WCW section on their website. I was wondering, by WWE doing this and putting WCW on the SmackDown vs. Raw video games mean that WWE is reviving WCW as the new third brand?-- Mikeymike2001 ( talk) 21:23, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
Something needs to be done so that these two articles are in synch. Holly's page has him listed as having one reign as Intercontinental Champion, however he is not included in Wikipedia's List of WWE Intercontinental Champions. Now to me, this is a very simple issue: one of the pages needs to be fixed. So I sought to correct this in Holly's page by removing his reign, however it was reverted back to say that he was champion. So then I tried to correct the List of Intercontinental Champions so as to include Holly's reign, however this was reverted back to say he does not have a reign (and has been reverted multiple times when someone tries to add Holly in). Now call me crazy (just using it as a figure of speech, please no one post a simple 'You're crazy' response), but this seems to be a glaring contradiction that tarnishes the credability of both pages, and to an extent Wikipedia itself, to have one page say "Yes, Holly had a reign" and the other to say "No, Holly did not have a reign," and for both to be considered accurate. Granted, Holly's page does say the reign is unofficial, however every other 'List of (insert) Championship' page has unofficial reigns listed. Personally I feel his reign should not be counted, as there are numerous other instances where wrestlers have pinned champions in controversial fashion, been declared champion, and then the title was vacated as a result, and those wresltes are not listed as having reigns. But I have grown tired of trying to edit (and re-edit) the pages myself, so I'm going to appeal to those here on the project page as to what action should be taken so that those two pages are not giving contradictory informantion. 76.29.164.90 ( talk) 03:51, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
Just wondering, what's the recent colouring in of navbox templates? I'm not entirely against the use of it, as protesting against it probably goes too much into WP:DEW territory. But if we're going along with it, I would like to warn about WP:COLOR and using too much bright colours that might cause accessibility problems. The amount of bright red/black I'm seeing recently is a little too unbearable. -- Θaks ter 18:50, 5 April 2011 (UTC)
This is off topic, does anyone know how Calloway is doing after WM? Any legit injuries? If all of it was a work, they sure as hell did a good job selling it. Except for that idiot ref telling Hunter to back off after he fell outside the ring... Sephiroth storm ( talk) 02:19, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
Since it's starting to heat up over at the related article (albeit with bad sourcing), I might as well give a heads up here. It might very well be the case that World Wrestling Entertainment is pulling a KFC and renaming themselves simply as "WWE". A comparison of their corporate site from last May to today seems to say it all. However, with no official press statement like the WWF/WWE change in 2002, I'm not entirely sure how to approach this at the moment.
I'm also assuming if this move is official, we'll take the approach we've always done in the articles and not resort to revisionism (i.e. pre-2002 is World Wrestling Federation (WWF), 2002-2011 is World Wrestling Entertainment (WWE), post-2011 is simply WWE). -- Θaks ter 22:23, 3 April 2011 (UTC)
The beginning of the opening article in this weeks Wrestling Observer:
"There was a meeting this past week at Titan Towers where the decision was finalized by Vince McMahon, although it had been pretty much expected for some time, that World Wrestling Entertainment is no more.
The company formerly known as World Wrestling Entertainment, Inc., is now WWE Inc. and the initials no longer stand for anything. It's basically a continuation of trying to eliminate the words "wrestling" and "wrestler" from the vocabulary thinking it is holding the company back.
The company sent out its annual report this week listing its name as "The New WWE," and on the front page it says, "The launch of a WWE Network is an example of one transformative change in our sights. Further exemplifying this paradigm shift, we are changing our branding from World Wrestling Entertainment to WWE and moving beyond our wrestling heritage. We believe The New WWE will ultimately generate meaningful earnings growth and support greater returns to you, our shareholders." 75.146.53.33 ( talk) 00:21, 7 April 2011 (UTC)
Why is everyone talking about some pointless name change that'll probably only affect the stock market when the WrestleMania XXVII page is starting to get out of control. From people adding unnessassary info to removing references & entire sections. Voices in my Head WrestleMania XXVII 15:08, 7 April 2011 (UTC)--
It's official: http://corporate.wwe.com/news/2011/2011_04_07.html 138.163.106.71 ( talk) 15:53, 7 April 2011 (UTC)
I think people are going a little crazy with this whole updating for the name change thing. What's the point of moving templates and creating a bunch of redirects? -- Scorpion 0422 23:26, 10 April 2011 (UTC)
There are two issues I have found regarding the ECW section of the Triple Crown Championship page. The first being that the lead section states that "National promotions that officially recognize Triple Crown winners include World Wrestling Entertainment, Total Nonstop Action Wrestling, Ring of Honor, and the defunct Extreme Championship Wrestling." I believe that ECW should be removed from this list, as the original company did not recognize any such accolade. It was not until years after the company shut down and filed bankruptcy, and WWE subsequently purchased all of it's assets, including the championships, that recognition came to an ECW TC (February 27, 2006 according to the source given). The ECW promotion no longer existed; WWE was the controlling promotion.
And the second issue is the source itself. The only reference to an ECW TC is from Matthew Cardona calling Mikey Whipwreck the ECW Triple Crown Champion. To me this does not seem like a very reliable source to be using as justification for creating an ECW TC. Granted WWE.com allowed the material to be published on their website, however it was not them directly saying so, they essentially just put up what Cardona stated. There have been several instances where a person saying they achieved something (Miz stating he is a Grand Slam Champion, JBL stating he was a GSC before he won the IC), and those have not been allowed into articles. So a person with no control over the matter saying that someone else is a TCC does not seem to have much credability to it. Thoughts? 76.29.164.90 ( talk) 06:58, 8 April 2011 (UTC)
(Tangent) If we're going to include ROH, then what about Samoa Joe? He was (albeit briefly) part of the Prophecy when they were tag champs, and defended it with them in a 6 man tag when they were using the freebird rule. 92.12.18.17 ( talk) 12:44, 10 April 2011 (UTC)
how about WCW i have the table and here is a link if its reliable and everyone else agrees ill add it http://www.angelfire.com/ny2/RayNRon/misc/interesting.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by Black60dragon ( talk • contribs) 01:38, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
Apparently, he signed a new Legends Contract. So is he worthy of personnel or not. Either he is not there or I didn't look very well. ( UnreliableBeing ( talk) 07:06, 11 April 2011 (UTC))
Hello, anyone here? -- UnreliableBeing ( talk) 15:32, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
I know that both Brie and Nikki Bella's histories in WWE are the same, but should we make separate pages for Brie and Nikki now since Brie won the WWE Divas Championship?-- Mikeymike2001 ( talk) 22:36, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
I dont think so. their history is still the same right now and probably will stay that way, too early to tell Wrestling0101 ( talk) 23:18, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
did there used to be a brie bella page before because she debuted a year or so before her sister did-- Black60dragon ( talk) 00:31, 15 April 2011 (UTC)
They need to be renamed from World Wrestling Entertainment to WWE Wrestling0101 ( talk) 05:21, 17 April 2011 (UTC)
He has used that nickname before his match with the king(just before) on an interview on WWE.com Swagger called him mr wrestlemania and that was right after the match. All Raw Cole called him self mr wrestlemania and the smackdown after him and swagger reffered to cole as the new mr wrestlemania. I have tryed putting it on his nickname section because its got everythig required to be a nickname in wrestling but some ppl who are not NPOV keep reverting itin the edit summary there resions have been NO NEVER or SHAWN MICHEALS IS MR WRESTLEMANIA thats if they give reasions. The shawn micheals thing isnt a resion not to as I pointed out to that person Buddy Rodgers and Ric Flair are both the Nature Boy(WHOO!). Its obvious they take offence to wwe calling cole mr wresltemania but who the hell cares!! wiki is npov so there pov doesnt matter at all! there usless. pls would you step in and make it officeal that it should stay that way or summit. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.222.227.22 ( talk) 21:42, 10 April 2011 (UTC)
God I swear sometimes people on here bring up the dumbest questions. Seriously who honestly cares that a tool like Michael Cole is trying to being like Shawn Michaels (which will never happen). BTW do any of you guys even have a life off wikipedia?-- Voices in my Head WWE 22:53, 11 April 2011 (UTC)
So your just going to be rude then and insult me? Nice I'm beginning to lose faith in the education system in America because of manners like these.
And another thing, some people on here really are starting to take this stuff too seriously. Like a frickin religion. Last time I checked this page was to talk on improving articles not to debate on stupid dumbass questions like if a tool like Michael Cole (and FYI he was already an ass before he went heel) if he's the NEW Mr. WrestleMania. While I'd say short answer hell no just get off the computer and go to a bar or something people.-- Voices in my Head WWE 00:49, 12 April 2011 (UTC)
Wow. That's all I can say after reading this discussion. You talk about taking wikipedia too seriously, yet you completely jump over an unregistered user who is clearly unfamiliar with policy. Whether these users "have lives" or not has absolutely nothing to do with discussion. It's that kind of hostile attitude that has given WP:PW a bad reputation. -- Scorpion 0422 22:02, 12 April 2011 (UTC)
This conversation is stupid. It would have been much easier to give a simple answer to the original question. This conversation should end now. GaryColemanFan ( talk) 05:40, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
Hey if any of you guys haven't noticed by now, Over the Limit (2011) is, for some reason, up for deletion. Even though the event is a month and a half away and tickets are on sale at both Ticketmaster.com and at KeyArena's website.-- Voices in my Head WWE 20:27, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
FYI, User:62.255.132.174 keeps changing mentions of the World Wrestling Federation/WWF to World Wrestling Entertainment/WWE. I've made note of it on the user's talk page, but the user blanked the page. -- Jtalledo (talk) 13:25, 19 April 2011 (UTC)
Greetings. The project's input is needed here. An editor is trying to push a color change on this template, and I am not the only one to oppose it. However, more eyes on this would be helpful to gain a consensus as to whether to change the colors or not. ArcAngel (talk) ) 19:16, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
“ | In general, styles for tables and other block-level elements should be set using CSS classes, not with inline style attributes. This is because the site-wide CSS is more carefully tested to ensure compatibility with a wide range of browsers; it also creates a greater degree of professionalism by ensuring a consistent appearance between articles. Deviations from standard conventions are acceptable where they create a semantic distinction ... | ” |
|basestyle=
, |groupstyle=
, |titlestyle=
, ... in the navigation box, we are using "inline style attributes" which are overriding the "CSS classes" set by
MediaWiki:Common.css. There are exceptions for cases where deviations create a "semantic distinction". However, in this case, there is no semantic distinction, but purely decorative. The comments about Coke, Pepsi, ... is basically
WP:OTHERSTUFF in my opinion, and not what is being discussed here. I can certainly drop a note at
WT:Accessibility to invite wider opinion. Thanks!
Plastikspork
―Œ(talk)
03:02, 25 April 2011 (UTC)Sheesh! What began as just a little bit of innocent and decorative sprucing up, turns into freaking WWIII! You know what...screw it, I give up! I've seen less outrage at war protests than I'm seeing here over COLORING THE HEADER ON A STUPID FREAKING TEMPLATE! Mind if I breathe, or will that somehow offend somebody as well? Vjmlhds 11:37, 25 April 2011 (UTC)
I agree with Gary. [3] This is EXACTLY what I was talking about with the Michael Cole discussion. People bring up the dumbest, most pointless topics on here. I'm really starting to think there aren't any people on here who have a life outside of Wikipedia.-- Voices in my Head WWE 16:11, 25 April 2011 (UTC)
So in that case, are we all pretty much in agreement that the default should stay? Crisis. E X E 20:14, 25 April 2011 (UTC)
If anyone hasn't noticed by now, Over the Limit (2011) is for some reason up for deletion even though the event is confirmed by WWE to be taking place, tickets are on sale on both Ticketmaster.com and KeyArena's web page. Has future notability ever been a reason to delete a pay-per-view article that will be happening and even if it's deleted someone will probably just start it back up?-- Voices in my Head WWE 17:19, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
http://realwrestlecrap.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=WWE&action=display&thread=362335
my sincere apologies on behalf of my fellow forum members. Crisis. E X E 16:57, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
An article for them has been created (again), I don't really follow wrestling week-by-week, I just have a vague idea of what's going on, so I don't know if they're notable enough now to keep. The article is blank at the moment anyway, I just thought I'd offer it to the masses since it's lasted a week or so without being deleted this time. BulbaThor ( talk) 09:28, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
We could do with another person or two watching Ryder's article. His swelling fan following is leading to lots of repetitive vandalism about him being Internet Champion (a fictional title he gave himself for being so over online), I dunno if this is enough to have him protected or not but I thought I should mention it if anyone can put him on a watch list. Tony2Times ( talk) 22:29, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
Jeff Jarrett's twitter page says the following: "Impact...it's now Impact Wrestling. RT @SeanWWETNAfan: @JeffJarrettTNA has TNA been renamed or only impact?". Should "Total Nonstop Action Wrestling" be moved to "Impact Wrestling"? -- BOD will be your end of days! ۞ 17:24, 6 May 2011 (UTC)
On the Kamala (wrestler) article, someone added a link today to a Spanish version of the article. The Spanish version has much of the same information, but it's titled "James Simons (luchador))". Clearly, this is not the same wrestler. Does anyone here edit on the Spanish Wikipedia and have the ability to fix that? GaryColemanFan ( talk) 05:13, 8 May 2011 (UTC)
it almost 2 weeks to it, there are 2 matches confirmed in it, but still no official page... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mountain3333 ( talk • contribs) 17:12, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
The IP makes a good point. I've left two messages on King of Hearts (whose an Admin) talk page yet he's still not responded. We need an Admin to move the page back to live article again. If any of you guys know an admin who'll respond to a talk page message faster than 24 hours can you please contact him/her and ask that person if they can do what I'm leaving a message here about.-- Voices in my Head WWE 01:00, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
So we're just gonna keep it in incubation past the day of the event.-- Voices in my Head WWE 02:37, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
Aside from the low quality poster this article is ready to move out of incubation. Does anyone know an admin who'll do the job and who'll respond in less than 24 hours because King of Hearts isn't responding at all.-- Voices in my Head WWE 17:11, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
King of Hearts decided to leave the article in incubation till the day of the event (9 days from now). But the article itself looks like (and pardon me for saying this) a bunch of SHIT.-- Voices in my Head WWE 01:37, 14 May 2011 (UTC)
Specificially in regards to Dick Murdoch: are you ribbin' me that the content about his appearance at a Royal Rumble is nearly equal to the content about his tag team with Dusty Rhodes? That's just in number of bytes. The Royal Rumble mention appears to offer more details. All I can say is "Wow." RadioKAOS ( talk) 11:02, 11 May 2011 (UTC)
I see Jack Veneno listed there. Once again, this must be the anti-book bias I was talking about. Do you mean to tell me that no one here besides myself has read To Be the Man? Not only will you find references, but perhaps information which is contrary to what's currently on the page. I've already made it perfectly clear that my copy is in storage, otherwise I'd be happy to help. Speaking of To Be the Man and references, I already pointed out this book as a source for Charles Robinson when it was nominated for deletion. I see no one has taken the bait there, either. RadioKAOS ( talk) 11:15, 11 May 2011 (UTC)
I know this is already being discussed on the article's talk page and WP:RM soon enough, but I'm just a bit bugged that the actual TNA promotion article was moved to "TNA Impact Wrestling" when only the show has been rebranded. May I please have a response to reverting the article back to its original name? I've tried moving it myself, but the article name is already taken as a redirect. Please tell me what the verdict should be. Thank you. -- SAVIOR_ SELF .777 03:25, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
Promotion = TNA
TV Show = Impact Wrestling
Vjmlhds 04:03, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
I Neeed moderator/administrator approval of moving the article back to its original page. A regular user can't do so. -- SAVIOR_ SELF .777 04:26, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
Vjmlhds You are correct I just spoke with a TNA executive via twitter http://twitter.com/#!/DavidSahadi/status/69137336469950464 The Promotion is TNA and the Show is Impact Wrestling Zanwifi ( talk) 22:06, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
The Nexus (professional wrestling) is an article about The Corre. It's very week-by-week, and parts of it are very poorly written. Also all the references but one for the article are in the 'In wrestling' section with finishing moves and themes and so on. Last time an article was created it was deleted (like the rest of them) but there seemed to be no clear agreement on if they were/are notable enough to have their own article. I'm not sure how to nominate an article for deletion, or I would do to get a consensus, can anybody help? BulbaThor ( talk) 13:06, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
while this is sad news,just letting you know that you might all want to watchlist his article for the next week or so. Crisis. E X E 17:24, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
There was a suggestion to post Savage's death on the in the news section, and it was posted briefly, but was soon pulled mainly for two reasons. 1) Notability (although given the amount of media coverage his death received, I'd say it was worthy) and 2) many users could not see past the fact that wrestling is "fake". So, they were quite critical of it detailing his career from a mostly "in-universe" style, with one user taking offense to calling Savage a World Champion. I don't think the quality should matter, since the ITN section has linked to stubs in the past (especially with some of the deaths). It's a shame that some users couldn't look past their own dislike for pro wrestling, especially since just about every mainstream news site deemed Savage's death as being front page material. -- Scorpion 0422 00:43, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
Mike McCurley (June 12, 1984) Is A Third Generation American Professional Wrestler Both His Great Uncle And Grandfather Were Great Wrestlers In The National Wrestling Alliance. In Jan 18, 2010 He Went On To Capture The NWA Mid-South World Tag Team Championships. Following In There Footsteps He Went On To Wrestle In Over 20 Matches Throughout Oklahoma, Kansas, Arkansas And Texas. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Okmastaman03:06, May 27, 2011 ( talk • contribs)
Several IPs and RajGandhi2 ( talk · contribs) are making unsourced edits to Christian (wrestler) and articles surrounding the WWE Championship, claiming that Christian won (past tense) the championship on the June 6 episode of WWE Raw. It is currently June 3 in my time zone, so unless these people are time travelers this is a major violation of WP:CRYSTAL. I've tried requesting semi for the affected pages and rolling back the edits, but could use some help identifying anything I may have missed. Thanks. — KuyaBriBri Talk 19:45, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
Anyone want to add info on the Chyna article regarding her latest endeavor? Truthfully, I was reluctant to believe it, but several sources are claiming the movie will be released this month, and they claim she is now, no longer claiming she did not make the film, in fact at least one source is claiming she intends to so more. Not to mention that vivid has released screenshots from the film. Sephiroth storm ( talk) 16:59, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
If any of you have been living under a rock for the last week or so WWE Capitol Punishment has been put up for AFD AGAIN by Chzz for his usual reason NO RELIABLE THIRD PARTY SOURCES even though they're all a bunch of Dirtsheet's. Y'all are more than welcome to help out with the article and the AFD.-- Voices in my Head WWE 04:46, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
Y'all can deal with Chzz and this AFD. I'm done fighting with him. Arguing with him is like arguing with a brick wall there's no point.-- Voices in my Head WWE 23:23, 9 June 2011 (UTC)