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 80 | ← | Archive 85 | Archive 86 | Archive 87 | Archive 88 | Archive 89 | Archive 90 |
TheWWExpert ( talk · contribs) is "correcting" WWE/F PPV match times based on "unedited film". This is problematic because in many cases the Wiki article now contradicts the cited source. Should we get this user's contributions rolled back? Thanks. -- Jameboy ( talk) 12:40, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
I have noticed that User:InedibleHulk has been adding the sponsors of WWE pay-per-view events to their respective articles. I am writing to find out how all of you feel about this because, personally, I feel it is completely irrelevant and adds nothing to the articles. Thanks, -- L A X 21:08, 16 October 2012 (UTC)
Yeah, so was I. One editor piped in when I brought it up above ("Brought to you by..."). I wouldn't be terribly against removing it from the lead, if there are more objections to it. But I feel it's a pretty significant factoid, given the prominence it gets before and during a show. Lead-worthy, but not absolutely necessary. InedibleHulk ( talk) 23:47, 16 October 2012 (UTC)
Oppose Useless! Sponsors have nothing really to do with the actual presentation and is nothing more than spam. What will we add next? The specific commercials that take place during an event to that pay the show. C'moooon! Get this mess out of here! 173.0.254.226 ( talk) 15:10, 21 October 2012 (UTC)
Rey Mysterio and Sin Cara was just created. Too soon? MPJ -US 23:41, 22 October 2012 (UTC)
Seriously though, I blanked the newer one and made it a redirect to the older one. I restored the newer one and redirected the old one instead, since the new one sucks significantly less. Is that proper?
InedibleHulk (
talk)
02:48, 23 October 2012 (UTC)
This article is just plain wrong on too many fronts. Same with this user's contributions in general thus far. Methinks it's more cluelessness than vandalism. Does the article qualify for speedy deletion? Going through the criteria leads me to believe yes, but it wasn't clear. RadioKAOS – Talk to me, Billy 07:30, 25 October 2012 (UTC)
I left a note for this user, who responded. Based upon that, I remained convinced that he/she is new to Wikipedia, and that this may be the extent of the problem. The response was "Moving it to my sanbox until I can create a better wiki user experience." I did check back on the article prior to that and developed the impression that it was taking shape into something more coherent. Still, I have the impression that this is some sort of POV fork, and not sure it's within the proper context of the subject. Especially the reference to Brooke Hogan and her father, which to me has nothing to do with wrestling angles, and could be an in-joke which runs afoul of BLP. Because the article was developing beyond something more than a train wreck, I recommended that he/she consult one of the project regulars for help. RadioKAOS – Talk to me, Billy 21:07, 26 October 2012 (UTC)
Should we do a page for WWE's YouTube shows? I know Zack Ryder has his Z! True Long Island Story show on YouTube, but I was wondering if we should add a page for WWE's other YouTube shows? Keith Okamoto ( talk) 19:23, 27 October 2012 (UTC)
We have edge,Test,Kane,Undertaker... By not Brain Damage? it was his ring name his entire career. -- HHH Pedrigree ( talk) 20:58, 21 October 2012 (UTC)
Lambert is now Brain Damage, I'll leave the Cash/Ca$h decision to someone else. InedibleHulk ( talk) 19:12, 25 October 2012 (UTC)
I was wondering what you all might think of this article... Starship.paint ( talk) 10:12, 28 October 2012 (UTC)
One simple question. Does somebody know the current status of Ring Ka King and Lucha Libre USA? Are both promotions active or inactive? Are the championships active or inactive? I heared that the season ended and I think that both promotions are dead. -- HHH Pedrigree ( talk) 15:48, 28 October 2012 (UTC)
This list [1] seems a bit absurd and pointless. Ridernyc ( talk) 10:06, 23 October 2012 (UTC)
Seems like this is a widespread issue the second article I check somewhat randomly I find this [2]. Has anyone ever attempted a MoS for articles about wrestlers?. These "in wrestling" sections are a magnet for cruft and trivia. Listing every entrance song is going pretty far over the line into too much unencyclopedic intricate detail IMHO. Ridernyc ( talk) 16:11, 23 October 2012 (UTC)
Does anyone else think that the page for the Internet Champion should go? I do, but am unfamiliar with the deletion process. 67.181.76.194 ( talk) 16:19, 29 October 2012 (UTC)
This is a topic revive... below is the old info. Starship.paint ( talk) 03:39, 29 October 2012 (UTC)
OK, now, here is the current situation. Basically, me and K.O. decided that we should merge the articles back, and after posting on the talk page discussion about merging the articles, I proceeded to do so. Some background info, the original "WWE NXT" article was moved to "History of WWE NXT" by Kerbymanuel. After merging the two articles I tried to move History back to "WWE NXT", but only an admin could do so, so I temporarily moved it to "Wikipedia:WWE NXT". Yet, Kerbymanuel, who had been silent since I proposed the merging of the articles and K.O. agreed, soon split the articles again and undid my actions. I don't want an edit war, so I'd like the Project to come to a consensus on whether we should merge or split the articles WWE NXT and History of WWE NXT. My proposal, which K.O. agrees with, is that we merge the articles into "WWE NXT", whichj would focus on Season 1 to Season 5 of NXT, while the article NXT Wrestling would focus on the developmental territory period. Two articles for Seasons 1-5 is redundant. Starship.paint ( talk) 03:39, 29 October 2012 (UTC)
I think we need all three articles (not including "WE NXT"). "NXT Wrestling" is the promotion, "WWE NXT" is the show. I think "History of WWE NXT" is completely necessary because it'll basically talk about when NXT was a reality show before it became a showcase of FCW talent. The split of "WWE NXT" and "History of WWE NXT" will clear up any confusion of the very, very long article of "WWE NXT" to two articles of 2 different subjects. I say keep all three and clean them up. Srsrox ( talk) 13:03, 29 October 2012 (UTC)
"One year later when Mick Foley made his return to WWE, he was presented with the title in a framed case and officially became a Hardcore Legend. (WATCH) After Foley and Edge battled in a no holds barred classic at WrestleMania 22, Mrs. Foley’s Baby Boy named both himself and The Rated-R Superstar, as co-holders of the Hardcore Championship. (WATCH) It was absurd, but eight years after the title’s introduction, it almost seemed appropriate for a title that was intended to recognize the finest in utmost brutality.", From WWE It does mean that the Edge-Foley regin is official and Edge is a Grand Slam Champion? -- HHH Pedrigree ( talk) 20:11, 2 November 2012 (UTC)
What can I put in the section "Championships and accomplishments"? I mean, I can put Titles, but my question is... Can I put RAW General Manager, TNA General Manager, SD GM Consultant...? I think that aren't Championship or accomplishments, they are storyline jobs. -- HHH Pedrigree ( talk) 19:37, 30 October 2012 (UTC)
I'd say those count as accomplishments. Just like championships (also only a storyline job), these signify that the promotion has deemed the person worthy of a higher-profile position in the show. Teddy Long, for instance, became far more famous, "important" and better-paid as a GM than as a ref and manager. So he accomplished something there, even if he didn't win a tournament to do it. InedibleHulk ( talk) 20:18, 30 October 2012 (UTC)
Just something I happened to stumble on... The edit history of Tombstoneride ( talk · contribs) shows numerous created articles and related edits on supposed past pay-per-view events that I could not verify to be legitimate. Hopefully someone can verify the follow edits or invalidate them to then take an appropriate course of action. -- Unquestionable Truth-- 02:22, 5 November 2012 (UTC)
I've noticed many PPVs list the buyrate in the lead. I'm cool with that. But I fail to see the value of comparing it to the buyrate of the previous year's event (such as at SummerSlam 2010). I think, if a comparison is made at all, it should be made to the previous month's PPV. That way, trends are apparent. Nothing is learned from comparing two events, separated by a year's worth of intermittent PPVs. Thoughts? InedibleHulk ( talk) 13:09, 8 November 2012 (UTC)
Not long ago, HHHPedigree asked here about moving Marvin Lambert and Christopher Baumann to Brain Damage (wrestler) and Chri$ Ca$h. Nobody objected to either and GaryColemanFan gave his blessing for Brain Damage. The first was easy enough, but the second already exists as a redirect. I put a speedy deletion tag on it to clear it up, but it was removed, saying consensus is needed. So...how about it? Do we have consensus for this? InedibleHulk ( talk) 18:24, 9 November 2012 (UTC)
Done. InedibleHulk ( talk) 21:35, 11 November 2012 (UTC)
There are a couple of changes to Template:Infobox professional wrestler that I think might be a good idea.
Any thoughts?
McPhail ( talk) 19:45, 10 November 2012 (UTC)
I have a page currently saved in my user pages that would be a great start for someone trying to create a page for Travis Tyler of NXT Wrestling. Any type of assistance with this article would be greatly appreciated!! The article is at the following link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Scca8704/Sam_Udell Scca8704 ( talk) 10:46, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
I'm working on the sources but he does have an amateur wrestling background and has worked the indy promotions in Colorado. Asylum Championship Wrestling was the promotion that trained him in Colorado Springs. I know they don't have an article on here either but unless they're mainstream indy I guess they don't get an article. Not to mention that the websites for the promotions there are not as detailed and not frequently updated. This is the main reason why I haven't pushed this out as an article yet and have kept it in my personal user pages. Scca8704 ( talk) 17:15, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
Why is there an article for this guy when his only notable moment was being jobbed out to Ryback? On top of that, the entirety of his In Wrestling section was copied and pasted from Brent Albright's article. 68.200.222.137 ( talk) 15:09, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
I just thought I'd let everyone know that an editor has nominated three PPVs for deletion here:
I'll pre-emptively state that this isn't a violation of WP:CANVASS, as I am alerting people to a relevant AfD, not swaying the votes. – Richard BB 09:41, 14 November 2012 (UTC)
I was thinking, since everybody in the Developmental roster is in NXT, maybe we should split the roster to who appears on WWE NXT that airs overseas and on Hulu Plus and who is just appearing at NXT Wrestling live events. The reason behind this is because on the WWE NXT site on WWE.com, there is a section showing the NXT wrestlers who appear on the program. What do you guys think? Keith Okamoto ( talk) 23:25, 10 November 2012 (UTC)
I ran across WrestlingData the other day, and was blown away. Not just by the ridiculous size of it and the many useful ways to view the data, but by how I haven't noticed it in the twelve years it's apparently been around. But then I noticed an Edit button, and my bullshit alarm buzzed a bit. I've done some minor digging, but can't establish just how much of this is user-submitted and/or fact-checked, or what those processes involve. I've spent a few hours browsing, and haven't seen any obvious factual errors, based on what I know (quite a bit). But there's a LOT more here I'm totally unfamiliar with (most of the 1860s results, for example. RadioKAOS?) and it could be nothing but lies, for all I know. I say it leans toward legit, all things considered, and its scope makes the Internet Wrestling Database look like WWE.com.
What do you folks think or know about its Reliable Sourciness? Should we list it in the MoS? InedibleHulk ( talk) 03:27, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
Not knocking the Internet Wrestling Database, by the way. It's a fine site, and still growing. InedibleHulk ( talk) 03:33, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
I just noticed something. This is the English version of Genickbruch, currently used extensively in List of WWE personnel and elsewhere. I think, if Genickbruch is cool, the English version would be more appropriate for the English Wikipedia. InedibleHulk ( talk) 04:21, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
Humility can wait... Extreme Rules (2012) is now GA, thanks to my significant contributions! Huzzah! BEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEST IN THE WOOOOOOOOOOORLD!!!! Special mention to reviewer Batard0! Starship.paint ( talk) 12:49, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
In an earlier discussion, Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Professional_wrestling/Archive_85#How Many "Signature Moves" Can One Wrestler Have?, we established that we should not list signature moves for wrestlers when the moves have only been done once or are very basic moves. May I point out that Valentfred is an offender of this. Not sure if any of you all saw Miz vs Ziggler on Main Event, but well, he performed moves I've never seen him do before (Side Effect, flapjack, dropkick). And poof, within the week, Valentfred adds them to Miz's signature moves. 1 2 3. I've warned this user already, but he/she did not respond. What should we do? Starship.paint ( talk) 12:48, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
Hi! I was wondering if a member of this WikiProject could take a look at the article I was working on, TLC: Tables, Ladders & Chairs (2012). There is some discussion on the talk page as to what sources are reliable and for what reasons, and additionally some confusion about what information is relevant for an article on a WWE event. This was my first time expanding an article on Professional wrestling, and I've found an unusual amount of the content I have added being removed and would like someone knowledgeable in this area to express their opinion. Thank you. -- Odie5533 ( talk) 02:31, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
Yes, I fully agree with Starship on this. – Richard BB 11:18, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
Okay, so this is kinda related to the current TLC12 article, but applies to pretty much any recent WWE PPV article (I don't follow TNA PPV articles).Technically, " Wikipedia articles should be based mainly on reliable secondary sources". Using the TLC: Tables, Ladders & Chairs (2012) article in its current state, it is obvious to me how WWE.com (and not secondary sources) is definitely the most reliable source for the Event section (scheduled matches) and the infobox (basic event info). Yet, if we look at the Background section, you'll see that WWE.com is again used as a source to provide background info on the match. See Chairs match is used as a source multiple times throughout the background section. I feel that in this case, we should not use WWE.com and instead use secondary sources to cite the info. Firstly, WWE.com's "match previews" detailing the background will vanish once the match has actually taken place, to be replaced by a match report. If so, WWE.com will be unable to substantiate some of the claims being sourced. See Survivor Series Sheamus match. Secondly, secondary sources are readily available as coverage of WWE's TV/PPV programming where the background of the feuds take place. There are two solutions, either we stick to secondary sources like PWTorch for the background, or we use stuff like WebCite to take a screenshot of the page like one day before the PPV, so that we may preserve the source. What do you all think? Starship.paint ( talk) 10:07, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
Would anyone object to Robert Roode being moved to Bobby Roode? My rationale for this would be that Roode has reverted to performing as Bobby Roode for quite some time now and he has achieved his greatest success in this period. This move would allow more direct linking. In addition, "Bobby Roode" returns 892,000 Google results, compared to 554,000 for "Robert Roode".
This move does not require administrator intervention, so it could be moved by an editor if there are no objections.
(Also posted at Talk:Robert Roode) McPhail ( talk) 18:58, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
Is there any policy, guideline or past discussion that would exclude a notable and well-documented wrestler from Wikipedia simply because he's a bear? If not, I think I may create my first article. InedibleHulk ( talk) 05:39, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
I've created the article. I figure there's not much point getting it perfect first, since this is Wikipedia and mistakes are constantly fixed. It's at Terrible Ted. I'm kind of proud. But not so proud to not listen to valid criticism or suggestions. I don't want schoolchildren writing reports on this guy to misinform their teachers. InedibleHulk ( talk) 23:35, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
These pages seem pretty helpful. Ongoing list of 2012 title holders and Final list of 2011 title holders. Starship.paint ( talk) 23:58, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
Came across a reference to [3]. Is this website reliable? Starship.paint ( talk) 09:16, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
What type of source is acceptable for professional wrestling? Please reply back. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Walls Jericho ( talk • contribs) 07:38, 6 December 2012 (UTC)
I've changed one of these, but noticed it's widespread, so figured I'd bring this up here instead of on many talk pages. We're currently using a † to indicate who the current champ is in List of _______ Champions articles. When I see that, part of me automatically assumes they're dead, even though I know they aren't. This symbol has been commonly used for many years, in many books and websites, to say just that. Is there any reason we shouldn't just use a colour (which we also already do) or replace the dagger with another, more multi-purpose symbol? A "C" would work nicely, I think. InedibleHulk ( talk) 21:55, 7 December 2012 (UTC)
According to the dagger's article, "When placed immediately before or after a person's name, it indicates that the person is deceased." This is followed by four citations. I think that pretty much answers this question. But if I'm overlooking something, let me know. InedibleHulk ( talk) 22:01, 7 December 2012 (UTC)
Recently there's been a bit of dispute down at List of WWE Champions on whether the Greg Valentine/Bob Backlund matches held at MSG should be recognized even dubiously as they are now. The original match (October 19, 1981) featured a story-line limited to the New York area where Backlund executed an airplane spin and covered Valentine for the win, but in doing so inadvertently knocked the referee down. Summarily our addlepated official awarded Valentine the belt and there was much gnashing of teeth with the title being held up. But between the original match and the rematch where Backlund reclaimed the title he was recognized as champ everywhere else, making multiple title defenses. One user brought the issue up for revision relegating the incident to a sidenote but was challenged by a second asking it first be brought to talk. Since then there's been a series of reverts as the original user views his edit as non-contentious, asserting he's unable to edit this talk page and doesn't see the need perhaps as he believes himself ardently in the right. So why don't *I* step in and bring the quarrel to you? Other than, you know, it taking an exorbitant amount of time on an Android touchpad to do? That said, should the chart continue unofficially recognizing this phantom vacancy? Papacha ( talk) 05:36, 9 December 2012 (UTC)
Why the name is John Laurinaitis? I think that the common name is Ace, no Laurinaitis. We are in the internet era, so is normal that google find more John Laurinaitis over Johnny Ace, but he wrestled in Japan near 15 years as Johnny Ace and he was one year as Laurinaitis in WWE. What do you think?-- HHH Pedrigree ( talk) 16:59, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
It's the Slammy Awards tonight and Daniel Bryan has already been awarded three before the show has begun. Some wrestlers are gonna have a ridiculous amount by the end of tomorrow, let alone next year and the year after. Surely there has to be a more economic way of representing them (if we even have to represent them at all, which I'm not in favour of but will bow to consensus) than the current one. I don't know what the solution is and am happy to hear any suggestions because it's going to look stupid soon. Can we just number them? Or make a separate table? Or take them off altogether? I can't be the only one to think it looks stupid? Tony2Times ( talk) 23:37, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
On a separate note, does Daniel_Bryan#External_links, The_Miz#External_links and other pages really need the Achievement boxes? They were added by Special:Contributions/112.204.53.199. Starship.paint ( talk) 00:07, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
Hi all, I hope you can help resolve an RM that has lingered near the bottom of the backlog for quite some time now regarding WWE NXT ( discussion). It looks like WWE NXT and History of WWE NXT are largely duplicate pages; at least this is what one user has argued. I wonder if a merge might not be more appropriate, but a quick look suggests History of WWE NXT is the superior article and mostly could just use the infobox from WWE NXT. Either way, the status quo doesn't seem to be desirable. Thanks, BDD ( talk) 20:48, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
Some IP's have updated the PWI 2012 award, but I don't see any soucre. Also, I found nothing in Internet. Are the awards real or fake? -- HHH Pedrigree ( talk) 19:51, 25 December 2012 (UTC)
Can we have some consistency here? I'm confused as to what we're doing here.
WWE has colors: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:WWE
TNA DID have colors for a while, but was JUST token off: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:TNA_Wrestling
Because WWE and TNA (BEFORE) had color, I changed ROH's color too, but they were reverted: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Ring_of_Honor
So what are we doing? Are we changing them all to colors or all of them back to default? This is confusing me. Srsrox ( talk) 17:25, 21 December 2012 (UTC)
Recently HHH Pedrigree has removed a number of singles finishing moves from tag team articles. Example is WMD from Jeri-Show. I asked him about it on whether there was a previous consensus and he said he thought there was one because of this edit by InedibleHulk. Simply put, I disagree with the removing of the singles finishing moves. Tag teams don't always have or use a double-team finishing move. Easy examples are the Prime Time Players who most commonly use Clash of the Titus or Young's Gut Check. Team Hell No have used only the chokeslam or the No! Lock to win matches. I mentioned Jeri-Show's WMD above also. Therefore I think that it's valid to include singles finishing moves (not signature moves) in tag team articles, if the finishing moves are used when the team wrestles together. For example there's no need to mention Bryan's 2011 guillotine choke in the Team Hell No article. What do you all think? Starship.paint ( talk) 01:06, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
List the finishers used for the team. Obviously. Whether it's single finishers or double finishers, if it's used FOR the team, they need to be included in here. If it's relevant to the team, then add it. If they win matches over single finishers, add the single finishers. This seems obvious to me. Srsrox ( talk) 22:34, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
Regarding the article of Tyler Black, WP:PW may wish to voice their opinion on the possible article name change to Seth Rollins here. Starship.paint ( talk) 08:16, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Canvassing. GaryColemanFan ( talk) 20:06, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
Now, I know that it's WP:PW policy to not list face or heel turns in headers. I can see the rationale why, with the commonly cited example Kane, that the multitude of turns would make the article seem quite hilarious. Yet, I do believe that certain articles do warrant for the use of face and heel turns in headers, because they do not turn as often as Kane and their turns do mean an actual change in their characters, storylines and careers such that a new subsection is warranted in their articles. Going down the list, people who do deserve such "privileges"... Alex Riley, Alberto Del Rio, Eve Torres, The Miz, Tyson Kidd and maybe Sheamus. What do you all think? Starship.paint ( talk) 08:30, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
Does somebody know the real age of Vladimir Kozlov? I see a lot of soucres, but everyone says a different thing. igf say that he was born in 1969. OWOW, in 1979. Cagematch and VSPLANTET, in 1972. Who's wrong? -- HHH Pedrigree ( talk) 21:48, 11 January 2013 (UTC)
First, Daniel Bridley to Nightmare Danny Davis. Now, Dan Marsh -> Dangerous Danny Davis. Does somebody want to talk in the talk page? -- HHH Pedrigree ( talk) 18:58, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
There seems to be a bit of an issue regarding this page, with someone adding that the current World Heavyweight Championship is the same title. I removed the information once already, citing WP:EXCEPTIONAL and lack of effort to amend a single other related page. I also noted in my removal that something of this nature should be formally discussed, on either that talk page or here on the project page, yet neither was done. As I consider myself only a "casual" editor in terms of getting too in depth on here, I wanted to appeal to anyone in the community that can help settle this issue. 67.181.76.194 ( talk) 18:19, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
I have started the move request for WrestleMania XXIX to move it to WrestleMania 29 input from other PW members would be greatly appreciated.-- Dcheagle • talk • contribs 02:14, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
As can be seen from [4] and many other old WrestleView results, WrestleView's archives appear to be down. Better grab the Google Caches / Wayback Machines / WebCite a Cache for the links. Starship.paint ( talk) 01:52, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
Hi everyone at WikiProject Professional wrestling!
Women's history month is around the corner, in March, and we're planning the second WikiWomen's History Month.
This event, which is organized by volunteers from the WikiWomen's Collaborative, supports improving coverage about women's history during the month of March. Events take place both offline and online. We are encouraging WikiProjects to focus on women's history related to their subject for the month of March. Ideas include:
We hope you'll participate! You can list your your project focus here, and also help improve our to-do list. Thank you for all you do for Wikipedia! SarahStierch ( talk) 20:38, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
Suggestion - look at Category:Female professional wrestlers by nationality and if nothing else do copy edits of the Mexican/Japanese etc. female wrestlers who do not get a lot of attention, you don't need to know anything about say La Amapola to do a copy edit of it. Just a suggestion to do in March. I think the current WWE women probably get attention in general, let's look at the more neglected female wrestlers instead. MPJ -US 04:39, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
Why is this site no considered reliable? I think it is. Perhaps I don't understand the Wikipedia meaning of reliable. If OWOW is reliable then why is Cagematch not. Statoke ( talk) 11:34, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
I propose we ignore NOTAFORUM, and make our picks. I say Lesnar's got it. InedibleHulk ( talk) 05:21, 27 January 2013 (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 80 | ← | Archive 85 | Archive 86 | Archive 87 | Archive 88 | Archive 89 | Archive 90 |
TheWWExpert ( talk · contribs) is "correcting" WWE/F PPV match times based on "unedited film". This is problematic because in many cases the Wiki article now contradicts the cited source. Should we get this user's contributions rolled back? Thanks. -- Jameboy ( talk) 12:40, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
I have noticed that User:InedibleHulk has been adding the sponsors of WWE pay-per-view events to their respective articles. I am writing to find out how all of you feel about this because, personally, I feel it is completely irrelevant and adds nothing to the articles. Thanks, -- L A X 21:08, 16 October 2012 (UTC)
Yeah, so was I. One editor piped in when I brought it up above ("Brought to you by..."). I wouldn't be terribly against removing it from the lead, if there are more objections to it. But I feel it's a pretty significant factoid, given the prominence it gets before and during a show. Lead-worthy, but not absolutely necessary. InedibleHulk ( talk) 23:47, 16 October 2012 (UTC)
Oppose Useless! Sponsors have nothing really to do with the actual presentation and is nothing more than spam. What will we add next? The specific commercials that take place during an event to that pay the show. C'moooon! Get this mess out of here! 173.0.254.226 ( talk) 15:10, 21 October 2012 (UTC)
Rey Mysterio and Sin Cara was just created. Too soon? MPJ -US 23:41, 22 October 2012 (UTC)
Seriously though, I blanked the newer one and made it a redirect to the older one. I restored the newer one and redirected the old one instead, since the new one sucks significantly less. Is that proper?
InedibleHulk (
talk)
02:48, 23 October 2012 (UTC)
This article is just plain wrong on too many fronts. Same with this user's contributions in general thus far. Methinks it's more cluelessness than vandalism. Does the article qualify for speedy deletion? Going through the criteria leads me to believe yes, but it wasn't clear. RadioKAOS – Talk to me, Billy 07:30, 25 October 2012 (UTC)
I left a note for this user, who responded. Based upon that, I remained convinced that he/she is new to Wikipedia, and that this may be the extent of the problem. The response was "Moving it to my sanbox until I can create a better wiki user experience." I did check back on the article prior to that and developed the impression that it was taking shape into something more coherent. Still, I have the impression that this is some sort of POV fork, and not sure it's within the proper context of the subject. Especially the reference to Brooke Hogan and her father, which to me has nothing to do with wrestling angles, and could be an in-joke which runs afoul of BLP. Because the article was developing beyond something more than a train wreck, I recommended that he/she consult one of the project regulars for help. RadioKAOS – Talk to me, Billy 21:07, 26 October 2012 (UTC)
Should we do a page for WWE's YouTube shows? I know Zack Ryder has his Z! True Long Island Story show on YouTube, but I was wondering if we should add a page for WWE's other YouTube shows? Keith Okamoto ( talk) 19:23, 27 October 2012 (UTC)
We have edge,Test,Kane,Undertaker... By not Brain Damage? it was his ring name his entire career. -- HHH Pedrigree ( talk) 20:58, 21 October 2012 (UTC)
Lambert is now Brain Damage, I'll leave the Cash/Ca$h decision to someone else. InedibleHulk ( talk) 19:12, 25 October 2012 (UTC)
I was wondering what you all might think of this article... Starship.paint ( talk) 10:12, 28 October 2012 (UTC)
One simple question. Does somebody know the current status of Ring Ka King and Lucha Libre USA? Are both promotions active or inactive? Are the championships active or inactive? I heared that the season ended and I think that both promotions are dead. -- HHH Pedrigree ( talk) 15:48, 28 October 2012 (UTC)
This list [1] seems a bit absurd and pointless. Ridernyc ( talk) 10:06, 23 October 2012 (UTC)
Seems like this is a widespread issue the second article I check somewhat randomly I find this [2]. Has anyone ever attempted a MoS for articles about wrestlers?. These "in wrestling" sections are a magnet for cruft and trivia. Listing every entrance song is going pretty far over the line into too much unencyclopedic intricate detail IMHO. Ridernyc ( talk) 16:11, 23 October 2012 (UTC)
Does anyone else think that the page for the Internet Champion should go? I do, but am unfamiliar with the deletion process. 67.181.76.194 ( talk) 16:19, 29 October 2012 (UTC)
This is a topic revive... below is the old info. Starship.paint ( talk) 03:39, 29 October 2012 (UTC)
OK, now, here is the current situation. Basically, me and K.O. decided that we should merge the articles back, and after posting on the talk page discussion about merging the articles, I proceeded to do so. Some background info, the original "WWE NXT" article was moved to "History of WWE NXT" by Kerbymanuel. After merging the two articles I tried to move History back to "WWE NXT", but only an admin could do so, so I temporarily moved it to "Wikipedia:WWE NXT". Yet, Kerbymanuel, who had been silent since I proposed the merging of the articles and K.O. agreed, soon split the articles again and undid my actions. I don't want an edit war, so I'd like the Project to come to a consensus on whether we should merge or split the articles WWE NXT and History of WWE NXT. My proposal, which K.O. agrees with, is that we merge the articles into "WWE NXT", whichj would focus on Season 1 to Season 5 of NXT, while the article NXT Wrestling would focus on the developmental territory period. Two articles for Seasons 1-5 is redundant. Starship.paint ( talk) 03:39, 29 October 2012 (UTC)
I think we need all three articles (not including "WE NXT"). "NXT Wrestling" is the promotion, "WWE NXT" is the show. I think "History of WWE NXT" is completely necessary because it'll basically talk about when NXT was a reality show before it became a showcase of FCW talent. The split of "WWE NXT" and "History of WWE NXT" will clear up any confusion of the very, very long article of "WWE NXT" to two articles of 2 different subjects. I say keep all three and clean them up. Srsrox ( talk) 13:03, 29 October 2012 (UTC)
"One year later when Mick Foley made his return to WWE, he was presented with the title in a framed case and officially became a Hardcore Legend. (WATCH) After Foley and Edge battled in a no holds barred classic at WrestleMania 22, Mrs. Foley’s Baby Boy named both himself and The Rated-R Superstar, as co-holders of the Hardcore Championship. (WATCH) It was absurd, but eight years after the title’s introduction, it almost seemed appropriate for a title that was intended to recognize the finest in utmost brutality.", From WWE It does mean that the Edge-Foley regin is official and Edge is a Grand Slam Champion? -- HHH Pedrigree ( talk) 20:11, 2 November 2012 (UTC)
What can I put in the section "Championships and accomplishments"? I mean, I can put Titles, but my question is... Can I put RAW General Manager, TNA General Manager, SD GM Consultant...? I think that aren't Championship or accomplishments, they are storyline jobs. -- HHH Pedrigree ( talk) 19:37, 30 October 2012 (UTC)
I'd say those count as accomplishments. Just like championships (also only a storyline job), these signify that the promotion has deemed the person worthy of a higher-profile position in the show. Teddy Long, for instance, became far more famous, "important" and better-paid as a GM than as a ref and manager. So he accomplished something there, even if he didn't win a tournament to do it. InedibleHulk ( talk) 20:18, 30 October 2012 (UTC)
Just something I happened to stumble on... The edit history of Tombstoneride ( talk · contribs) shows numerous created articles and related edits on supposed past pay-per-view events that I could not verify to be legitimate. Hopefully someone can verify the follow edits or invalidate them to then take an appropriate course of action. -- Unquestionable Truth-- 02:22, 5 November 2012 (UTC)
I've noticed many PPVs list the buyrate in the lead. I'm cool with that. But I fail to see the value of comparing it to the buyrate of the previous year's event (such as at SummerSlam 2010). I think, if a comparison is made at all, it should be made to the previous month's PPV. That way, trends are apparent. Nothing is learned from comparing two events, separated by a year's worth of intermittent PPVs. Thoughts? InedibleHulk ( talk) 13:09, 8 November 2012 (UTC)
Not long ago, HHHPedigree asked here about moving Marvin Lambert and Christopher Baumann to Brain Damage (wrestler) and Chri$ Ca$h. Nobody objected to either and GaryColemanFan gave his blessing for Brain Damage. The first was easy enough, but the second already exists as a redirect. I put a speedy deletion tag on it to clear it up, but it was removed, saying consensus is needed. So...how about it? Do we have consensus for this? InedibleHulk ( talk) 18:24, 9 November 2012 (UTC)
Done. InedibleHulk ( talk) 21:35, 11 November 2012 (UTC)
There are a couple of changes to Template:Infobox professional wrestler that I think might be a good idea.
Any thoughts?
McPhail ( talk) 19:45, 10 November 2012 (UTC)
I have a page currently saved in my user pages that would be a great start for someone trying to create a page for Travis Tyler of NXT Wrestling. Any type of assistance with this article would be greatly appreciated!! The article is at the following link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Scca8704/Sam_Udell Scca8704 ( talk) 10:46, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
I'm working on the sources but he does have an amateur wrestling background and has worked the indy promotions in Colorado. Asylum Championship Wrestling was the promotion that trained him in Colorado Springs. I know they don't have an article on here either but unless they're mainstream indy I guess they don't get an article. Not to mention that the websites for the promotions there are not as detailed and not frequently updated. This is the main reason why I haven't pushed this out as an article yet and have kept it in my personal user pages. Scca8704 ( talk) 17:15, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
Why is there an article for this guy when his only notable moment was being jobbed out to Ryback? On top of that, the entirety of his In Wrestling section was copied and pasted from Brent Albright's article. 68.200.222.137 ( talk) 15:09, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
I just thought I'd let everyone know that an editor has nominated three PPVs for deletion here:
I'll pre-emptively state that this isn't a violation of WP:CANVASS, as I am alerting people to a relevant AfD, not swaying the votes. – Richard BB 09:41, 14 November 2012 (UTC)
I was thinking, since everybody in the Developmental roster is in NXT, maybe we should split the roster to who appears on WWE NXT that airs overseas and on Hulu Plus and who is just appearing at NXT Wrestling live events. The reason behind this is because on the WWE NXT site on WWE.com, there is a section showing the NXT wrestlers who appear on the program. What do you guys think? Keith Okamoto ( talk) 23:25, 10 November 2012 (UTC)
I ran across WrestlingData the other day, and was blown away. Not just by the ridiculous size of it and the many useful ways to view the data, but by how I haven't noticed it in the twelve years it's apparently been around. But then I noticed an Edit button, and my bullshit alarm buzzed a bit. I've done some minor digging, but can't establish just how much of this is user-submitted and/or fact-checked, or what those processes involve. I've spent a few hours browsing, and haven't seen any obvious factual errors, based on what I know (quite a bit). But there's a LOT more here I'm totally unfamiliar with (most of the 1860s results, for example. RadioKAOS?) and it could be nothing but lies, for all I know. I say it leans toward legit, all things considered, and its scope makes the Internet Wrestling Database look like WWE.com.
What do you folks think or know about its Reliable Sourciness? Should we list it in the MoS? InedibleHulk ( talk) 03:27, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
Not knocking the Internet Wrestling Database, by the way. It's a fine site, and still growing. InedibleHulk ( talk) 03:33, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
I just noticed something. This is the English version of Genickbruch, currently used extensively in List of WWE personnel and elsewhere. I think, if Genickbruch is cool, the English version would be more appropriate for the English Wikipedia. InedibleHulk ( talk) 04:21, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
Humility can wait... Extreme Rules (2012) is now GA, thanks to my significant contributions! Huzzah! BEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEST IN THE WOOOOOOOOOOORLD!!!! Special mention to reviewer Batard0! Starship.paint ( talk) 12:49, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
In an earlier discussion, Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Professional_wrestling/Archive_85#How Many "Signature Moves" Can One Wrestler Have?, we established that we should not list signature moves for wrestlers when the moves have only been done once or are very basic moves. May I point out that Valentfred is an offender of this. Not sure if any of you all saw Miz vs Ziggler on Main Event, but well, he performed moves I've never seen him do before (Side Effect, flapjack, dropkick). And poof, within the week, Valentfred adds them to Miz's signature moves. 1 2 3. I've warned this user already, but he/she did not respond. What should we do? Starship.paint ( talk) 12:48, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
Hi! I was wondering if a member of this WikiProject could take a look at the article I was working on, TLC: Tables, Ladders & Chairs (2012). There is some discussion on the talk page as to what sources are reliable and for what reasons, and additionally some confusion about what information is relevant for an article on a WWE event. This was my first time expanding an article on Professional wrestling, and I've found an unusual amount of the content I have added being removed and would like someone knowledgeable in this area to express their opinion. Thank you. -- Odie5533 ( talk) 02:31, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
Yes, I fully agree with Starship on this. – Richard BB 11:18, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
Okay, so this is kinda related to the current TLC12 article, but applies to pretty much any recent WWE PPV article (I don't follow TNA PPV articles).Technically, " Wikipedia articles should be based mainly on reliable secondary sources". Using the TLC: Tables, Ladders & Chairs (2012) article in its current state, it is obvious to me how WWE.com (and not secondary sources) is definitely the most reliable source for the Event section (scheduled matches) and the infobox (basic event info). Yet, if we look at the Background section, you'll see that WWE.com is again used as a source to provide background info on the match. See Chairs match is used as a source multiple times throughout the background section. I feel that in this case, we should not use WWE.com and instead use secondary sources to cite the info. Firstly, WWE.com's "match previews" detailing the background will vanish once the match has actually taken place, to be replaced by a match report. If so, WWE.com will be unable to substantiate some of the claims being sourced. See Survivor Series Sheamus match. Secondly, secondary sources are readily available as coverage of WWE's TV/PPV programming where the background of the feuds take place. There are two solutions, either we stick to secondary sources like PWTorch for the background, or we use stuff like WebCite to take a screenshot of the page like one day before the PPV, so that we may preserve the source. What do you all think? Starship.paint ( talk) 10:07, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
Would anyone object to Robert Roode being moved to Bobby Roode? My rationale for this would be that Roode has reverted to performing as Bobby Roode for quite some time now and he has achieved his greatest success in this period. This move would allow more direct linking. In addition, "Bobby Roode" returns 892,000 Google results, compared to 554,000 for "Robert Roode".
This move does not require administrator intervention, so it could be moved by an editor if there are no objections.
(Also posted at Talk:Robert Roode) McPhail ( talk) 18:58, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
Is there any policy, guideline or past discussion that would exclude a notable and well-documented wrestler from Wikipedia simply because he's a bear? If not, I think I may create my first article. InedibleHulk ( talk) 05:39, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
I've created the article. I figure there's not much point getting it perfect first, since this is Wikipedia and mistakes are constantly fixed. It's at Terrible Ted. I'm kind of proud. But not so proud to not listen to valid criticism or suggestions. I don't want schoolchildren writing reports on this guy to misinform their teachers. InedibleHulk ( talk) 23:35, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
These pages seem pretty helpful. Ongoing list of 2012 title holders and Final list of 2011 title holders. Starship.paint ( talk) 23:58, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
Came across a reference to [3]. Is this website reliable? Starship.paint ( talk) 09:16, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
What type of source is acceptable for professional wrestling? Please reply back. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Walls Jericho ( talk • contribs) 07:38, 6 December 2012 (UTC)
I've changed one of these, but noticed it's widespread, so figured I'd bring this up here instead of on many talk pages. We're currently using a † to indicate who the current champ is in List of _______ Champions articles. When I see that, part of me automatically assumes they're dead, even though I know they aren't. This symbol has been commonly used for many years, in many books and websites, to say just that. Is there any reason we shouldn't just use a colour (which we also already do) or replace the dagger with another, more multi-purpose symbol? A "C" would work nicely, I think. InedibleHulk ( talk) 21:55, 7 December 2012 (UTC)
According to the dagger's article, "When placed immediately before or after a person's name, it indicates that the person is deceased." This is followed by four citations. I think that pretty much answers this question. But if I'm overlooking something, let me know. InedibleHulk ( talk) 22:01, 7 December 2012 (UTC)
Recently there's been a bit of dispute down at List of WWE Champions on whether the Greg Valentine/Bob Backlund matches held at MSG should be recognized even dubiously as they are now. The original match (October 19, 1981) featured a story-line limited to the New York area where Backlund executed an airplane spin and covered Valentine for the win, but in doing so inadvertently knocked the referee down. Summarily our addlepated official awarded Valentine the belt and there was much gnashing of teeth with the title being held up. But between the original match and the rematch where Backlund reclaimed the title he was recognized as champ everywhere else, making multiple title defenses. One user brought the issue up for revision relegating the incident to a sidenote but was challenged by a second asking it first be brought to talk. Since then there's been a series of reverts as the original user views his edit as non-contentious, asserting he's unable to edit this talk page and doesn't see the need perhaps as he believes himself ardently in the right. So why don't *I* step in and bring the quarrel to you? Other than, you know, it taking an exorbitant amount of time on an Android touchpad to do? That said, should the chart continue unofficially recognizing this phantom vacancy? Papacha ( talk) 05:36, 9 December 2012 (UTC)
Why the name is John Laurinaitis? I think that the common name is Ace, no Laurinaitis. We are in the internet era, so is normal that google find more John Laurinaitis over Johnny Ace, but he wrestled in Japan near 15 years as Johnny Ace and he was one year as Laurinaitis in WWE. What do you think?-- HHH Pedrigree ( talk) 16:59, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
It's the Slammy Awards tonight and Daniel Bryan has already been awarded three before the show has begun. Some wrestlers are gonna have a ridiculous amount by the end of tomorrow, let alone next year and the year after. Surely there has to be a more economic way of representing them (if we even have to represent them at all, which I'm not in favour of but will bow to consensus) than the current one. I don't know what the solution is and am happy to hear any suggestions because it's going to look stupid soon. Can we just number them? Or make a separate table? Or take them off altogether? I can't be the only one to think it looks stupid? Tony2Times ( talk) 23:37, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
On a separate note, does Daniel_Bryan#External_links, The_Miz#External_links and other pages really need the Achievement boxes? They were added by Special:Contributions/112.204.53.199. Starship.paint ( talk) 00:07, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
Hi all, I hope you can help resolve an RM that has lingered near the bottom of the backlog for quite some time now regarding WWE NXT ( discussion). It looks like WWE NXT and History of WWE NXT are largely duplicate pages; at least this is what one user has argued. I wonder if a merge might not be more appropriate, but a quick look suggests History of WWE NXT is the superior article and mostly could just use the infobox from WWE NXT. Either way, the status quo doesn't seem to be desirable. Thanks, BDD ( talk) 20:48, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
Some IP's have updated the PWI 2012 award, but I don't see any soucre. Also, I found nothing in Internet. Are the awards real or fake? -- HHH Pedrigree ( talk) 19:51, 25 December 2012 (UTC)
Can we have some consistency here? I'm confused as to what we're doing here.
WWE has colors: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:WWE
TNA DID have colors for a while, but was JUST token off: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:TNA_Wrestling
Because WWE and TNA (BEFORE) had color, I changed ROH's color too, but they were reverted: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Ring_of_Honor
So what are we doing? Are we changing them all to colors or all of them back to default? This is confusing me. Srsrox ( talk) 17:25, 21 December 2012 (UTC)
Recently HHH Pedrigree has removed a number of singles finishing moves from tag team articles. Example is WMD from Jeri-Show. I asked him about it on whether there was a previous consensus and he said he thought there was one because of this edit by InedibleHulk. Simply put, I disagree with the removing of the singles finishing moves. Tag teams don't always have or use a double-team finishing move. Easy examples are the Prime Time Players who most commonly use Clash of the Titus or Young's Gut Check. Team Hell No have used only the chokeslam or the No! Lock to win matches. I mentioned Jeri-Show's WMD above also. Therefore I think that it's valid to include singles finishing moves (not signature moves) in tag team articles, if the finishing moves are used when the team wrestles together. For example there's no need to mention Bryan's 2011 guillotine choke in the Team Hell No article. What do you all think? Starship.paint ( talk) 01:06, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
List the finishers used for the team. Obviously. Whether it's single finishers or double finishers, if it's used FOR the team, they need to be included in here. If it's relevant to the team, then add it. If they win matches over single finishers, add the single finishers. This seems obvious to me. Srsrox ( talk) 22:34, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
Regarding the article of Tyler Black, WP:PW may wish to voice their opinion on the possible article name change to Seth Rollins here. Starship.paint ( talk) 08:16, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Canvassing. GaryColemanFan ( talk) 20:06, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
Now, I know that it's WP:PW policy to not list face or heel turns in headers. I can see the rationale why, with the commonly cited example Kane, that the multitude of turns would make the article seem quite hilarious. Yet, I do believe that certain articles do warrant for the use of face and heel turns in headers, because they do not turn as often as Kane and their turns do mean an actual change in their characters, storylines and careers such that a new subsection is warranted in their articles. Going down the list, people who do deserve such "privileges"... Alex Riley, Alberto Del Rio, Eve Torres, The Miz, Tyson Kidd and maybe Sheamus. What do you all think? Starship.paint ( talk) 08:30, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
Does somebody know the real age of Vladimir Kozlov? I see a lot of soucres, but everyone says a different thing. igf say that he was born in 1969. OWOW, in 1979. Cagematch and VSPLANTET, in 1972. Who's wrong? -- HHH Pedrigree ( talk) 21:48, 11 January 2013 (UTC)
First, Daniel Bridley to Nightmare Danny Davis. Now, Dan Marsh -> Dangerous Danny Davis. Does somebody want to talk in the talk page? -- HHH Pedrigree ( talk) 18:58, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
There seems to be a bit of an issue regarding this page, with someone adding that the current World Heavyweight Championship is the same title. I removed the information once already, citing WP:EXCEPTIONAL and lack of effort to amend a single other related page. I also noted in my removal that something of this nature should be formally discussed, on either that talk page or here on the project page, yet neither was done. As I consider myself only a "casual" editor in terms of getting too in depth on here, I wanted to appeal to anyone in the community that can help settle this issue. 67.181.76.194 ( talk) 18:19, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
I have started the move request for WrestleMania XXIX to move it to WrestleMania 29 input from other PW members would be greatly appreciated.-- Dcheagle • talk • contribs 02:14, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
As can be seen from [4] and many other old WrestleView results, WrestleView's archives appear to be down. Better grab the Google Caches / Wayback Machines / WebCite a Cache for the links. Starship.paint ( talk) 01:52, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
Hi everyone at WikiProject Professional wrestling!
Women's history month is around the corner, in March, and we're planning the second WikiWomen's History Month.
This event, which is organized by volunteers from the WikiWomen's Collaborative, supports improving coverage about women's history during the month of March. Events take place both offline and online. We are encouraging WikiProjects to focus on women's history related to their subject for the month of March. Ideas include:
We hope you'll participate! You can list your your project focus here, and also help improve our to-do list. Thank you for all you do for Wikipedia! SarahStierch ( talk) 20:38, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
Suggestion - look at Category:Female professional wrestlers by nationality and if nothing else do copy edits of the Mexican/Japanese etc. female wrestlers who do not get a lot of attention, you don't need to know anything about say La Amapola to do a copy edit of it. Just a suggestion to do in March. I think the current WWE women probably get attention in general, let's look at the more neglected female wrestlers instead. MPJ -US 04:39, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
Why is this site no considered reliable? I think it is. Perhaps I don't understand the Wikipedia meaning of reliable. If OWOW is reliable then why is Cagematch not. Statoke ( talk) 11:34, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
I propose we ignore NOTAFORUM, and make our picks. I say Lesnar's got it. InedibleHulk ( talk) 05:21, 27 January 2013 (UTC)