Jump to content

Talk:Charlotte Flair: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous edit
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit New topic
Cewbot (talk | contribs)
Bots
7,007,888 edits
 
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Talk header}}
{{Talk header}}
{{WikiProject banner shell|blp=yes|class=B|living=yes|listas=Flair, Charlotte|1=
{{WikiProject banner shell|blp=yes|class=B|listas=Flair, Charlotte|1=
{{WikiProject Biography |sports-work-group=yes |sports-priority=Low}}
{{WikiProject Biography |sports-work-group=yes |sports-priority=Low}}
{{WikiProject United States |importance=Low |NC=Yes |NC-importance=Low }}
{{WikiProject United States |importance=Low |NC=Yes |NC-importance=Low }}

Latest revision as of 14:47, 16 November 2024


12 Time Women's Champion?

[edit]

It should be noted on the page that while she has technically won 12 women's championships in her career, WWE does not yet recognize this statistic yet as it is unclear if her two NXT reigns actually count towards the full count of reigns.

But if they didn’t recognize her NXT Women’s title reigns, doesn’t that technically mean they wouldn’t recognize her as a Grand Slam Champion either? Megppg99 (talk) 04:46, 11 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

They do whatever they want. Whatever looks sexy on paper. They call the Street Profits "Triple crown" tag team champions bc they also won the NXT tag titles, meanwhile nobody on the main roster can even compete for those titles so it's a joke. In my eyes Charlotte is an 11x champion. 5 raw, 5 SD and 1 divas. I do not count her NXT reigns and according to Charlotte herself and Sonya Deville on Raw 7.19.21 they don't either. They called her 11x champion. I updated the article to reflect this. 68.196.76.206 (talk) 22:20, 24 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned references in Ashley Fliehr

[edit]

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Ashley Fliehr's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "OWOW":

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 18:36, 18 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move

[edit]
The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: page moved. Armbrust The Homunculus 14:26, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ashley Fliehr → Charlotte (wrestler) – She hasn't really wrestled as "Ashley Fliehr" or "Ashley Flair" from what I remember. All her notability has been as "Charlotte." GeicoHen (talk) 14:08, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Move discussion in progress

[edit]

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Bayley (wrestler) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 11:15, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Move to Charlotte Flair?

[edit]

Given the existence of other article names such as Naomi Knight and the recently-renamed Christian Cage, which have added the wrestlers' less commonly used character surnames in order to remove the need for the less concise (wrestler) disambiguation marker, would it possibly be a good idea to move Charlotte's article to outright become Charlotte Flair? I understand it's not quite the same deal, as Charlotte Flair has never been her official ring name at any point; however, she is openly acknowledged as Ric Flair's daughter as an integral part of the Charlotte persona, we know "Flair" is "Fliehr" re-spelled, and Charlotte Flair has become a common unofficial name to refer to her as to the point that even NXT commentators have slipped up and called her this on occasion. For that matter, it might be a good idea to do the same for Natalya and change her to Natalya Neidhart (which exists as a redirect), who has the added bonus of having her last name actually be used as part of the Natalya character name when she was originally introduced to the WWE main roster as well as on WWE.com in an article sourced from 2014. Thoughts? 73.204.231.72 (talk) 16:23, 18 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutely not. You said it yourself: "Charlotte Flair has never been her official ring name at any point" -so she is no Christian Cage case - and neither part is her real name. That Ric Flair is clearly acknowledged as her father is beside the point as "The Rock" isn't filed under "Rock Johnson". Str1977 (talk) 15:00, 4 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose As stated, not her real name and her character does not use her father's last name. - Kiraroshi1976 (talk) 17:54, 4 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You should change it as she now officially goes by Charlotte Flair FlashGaming (talk) 13:59, 8 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

2008 Arrest Details and Latimer Marriage Year

[edit]

The text of the cited news story only mentions an "unidentified 22-year-old man", not Riki Johnson. Furthermore, was she actually married at this time (the entry says "then-husband")? If you search Fliehr at the Mecklenburg County Record Database (http://meckrod.manatron.com/Marriage/SearchEntry.aspx?e=newSession), it shows a marriage license between the two was dated May 2010; so (assuming that 2010 date is accurate) either (a) they were married somewhere else in 2008, divorced, then remarried in 2010, or (b) they weren't married in 2008.

Somewhat related, the Latimer marriage took place in 2013 (if that detail would help the entry) according to the Orange County Comptroller (again, search Fliehr at http://or.occompt.com/recorder/eagleweb/docSearch.jsp). Dalton Imperial (talk) 15:09, 3 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The Queen

[edit]

@TheBellaTwins1445: re your removal at special:diff/735897565

Assuming you watched Raw last night you must remember hearing Charlotte being called this. It is definitely a reliable change to introduce this nickname to her article.

I did not introduce any new sources. I cited ones we have already accepted. Please add back the information you removed from the page.

I realize the Bellas are sore about Charlotte ending Nikki's reign but that is no reason to go and remove her nicknames. Ranze (talk) 03:36, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

There is no source to reference so the removal was valid. Chris "WarMachineWildThing" (talk) 03:52, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I aliased 3 sources already present on the page for it. I can find some new ones if you like. Ranze (talk) 04:48, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Ranze: knock it off dude. You've been through this process before. Stop adding unsourced, nonnotable nicknames for wrestlers. CrashUnderride 04:01, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The nickname had 3 sources next to it, if you actually check the diff. It established notability going back for some time. One of Charlotte's moves is actually named after this nickname, it's clearly notable. Ranze (talk) 04:48, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
You put three sources next to it but none of them said that was her nickname.LM2000 (talk) 05:13, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@LM2000: I will reproduce the 3 sources I originally expanded, here for you to read, along with explanations.

  1. "Views from the Hawke's Nest: NXT Takeover". 411MANIA. 8 June 2014. Charlotte hit the Bow Down to the Queen
    This names one of her moves, BDttQ, clearly Charlotte is "the Queen" being bowed down to, in the move. It is a reinforcement of her nickname every time the announcers call the move. If this existed in isolation and Charlotte were some kind of monarchist then I could understand hesitation, but this links into the other sources...
  2. Trionfo, Richard (November 30, 2015). "WWE RAW REPORT: A NEW GROUP IS FORMED, IS THE QUEEN OF THE JUNGLE SHOWING HER TRUE STRIPES?, ARE THE NEW DAY TURNING INTO J&J SECURITY FOR SHEAMUS?, A FEW RETURNS, AND MORE". PWInsider. Retrieved November 30, 2015.
    The portion of the title "IS THE QUEEN OF THE JUNGLE SHOWING HER TRUE STRIPES?" refers to Charlotte feigning an injury then pinning Becky Lynch after her father distracted her. Who else do you think 'queen of the jungle' refers to here?
  3. Trionfo, Richard (June 23, 2016). "WWE SMACKDOWN REPORT: SETH ROLLINS MAKES AN OPEN CHALLENGE, THE BOSS OR THE QUEEN?, THE WYATTS MAKE A STATEMENT, AND MORE". Pro Wrestling Insider. Retrieved July 17, 2016.
    The title portion "THE BOSS OR THE QUEEN?" refers to the match between Sasha Banks (do you accept her nickname is "The Boss") and Charlotte. The article even includes this sentence if you bothered to read it: "Charlotte says the only statement that is going to be made is her bowing down to her. Sasha might be the Boss, but she is the Queen." I added this quote to the article's present citation of it.

Here too I will reproduce the 5 sources from WWE.com that you just removed in special:diff/735951179. I'm wondering if you even checked them before deleting them and demanding consensus, even though nobody had actually objected to them yet.

  1. Medalis, Kara A. (13 August 2014). "NXT Women's Champion Charlotte vs. Bayley". Will Charlotte sustain her rule over the NXT Divas division and make Bayley "Bow Down to the Queen" at NXT TakeOver?
    As above, this is simply supporting the move, clearly "the Queen" in the move's name is Charlotte.
  2. Taylor, Scott (26 May 2015). "'The Four Horsewomen' of NXT: Sasha Banks, Charlotte, Bayley and Becky Lynch on how they're changing women's wrestling". CHARLOTTE: Honestly, people ask all the time if we feel pressure to deliver, or do we feel pressure from people putting us in these positions. But I don't think any of us feel the pressure, just because we're able to lean on each other. I don't know how to explain it; you all know what I mean? Watch: .. The Queen vs. The Boss
    WWE here is supporting the phrase "The Queen vs. The Boss" for a Sasha/Charlotte match, nuff said.
  3. "Come at the Queen". 15 February 2016. Brie's Divas Championship Match with Charlotte at WWE Fastlane has taken on new meaning .. Charlotte was free to build momentum with a second victory over Alicia Fox
    "the Queen" in the title is referring to Charlotte, challengers like Alicia Fox are coming at her
  4. "Sasha and Charlotte are on the move in the WWE Power Rankings". 16 July 2016.
    The evidence here is actually in the URL.
  5. Wortman, James (21 August 2016). "Charlotte def. WWE Women's Champion Sasha Banks". The Boss bows to "the queen."
    The recent article on the summer slam win should really be the final nail in the coffin, you do understand who "the queen" is here, right?

What objections do you have to these five? I've presented overwhelming evidence here. Ranze (talk) 05:38, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The references refer to the move. Do you think Bayley should be called "The Stunner" because a 411Mania headline once said: "Bayley Hits The Stunner"?LM2000 (talk) 05:53, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Ranze, just stop. You behavior and repeated additions of non-notable nicknames, disruptive editing and attempts to use sources that don't say anything about what your using them to source, will eventually get you blocked. CrashUnderride 06:36, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@LM2000: knowing Ranze, they will want to start listing "The Stunner" as a nickname for Bayley. lol. CrashUnderride 06:37, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Ranze: Like I said before its unsourced. I have looked at every link you posted, ive read them carefully top to bottom, none of them refer to Queen being her nickname, just a move, which is the issue here. If you present something that says her nickname is now The Queen then im sure there will be no issue, until then it's a justified removal. Chris "WarMachineWildThing" (talk) 06:45, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It's clear to me that the people objecting have not checked all of the sources. Perhaps you looked at one of the weaker ones and stopped there, not checking further.

@LM2000: only some of the sources do as you say. Ignore them if you'd like and focus on the ones which are clearly referring to Charlotte as "The Queen". For example here are two I'd like you to take a second look at:

This is not a new nickname though, it is using one that she's had for at least a year, as its incorporated into her move name. Ranze (talk) 09:31, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Crash Underride: when you are done telling jokes, feel free to look at sources like the one above. My adding proof is not disruptive. This nickname is notable. These sources all support "The Queen" connected with Charlotte, some more clearly than others. Please stop engaging in false accusations. Ranze (talk) 09:31, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@WarMachineWildThing: "its unsourced" is incorrect, I just listed sources for you, and I included sources each time I added it. Chris/WMWT you clearly missed something. Are you expecting the word "nickname" to be used? Look at the two sources I re-posted for LM2000 again please. Ranze (talk) 09:31, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Her finishing move is literally called "Bow to the Queen" and those sources all have to word "bow" shortly followed by the word "queen".LM2000 (talk) 10:02, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

WP:AGF is becoming difficult when you engage in misleading wordplay like this. Review the following sentence:

Charlotte says the only statement that is going to be made is her bowing down to her. Sasha might be the Boss, but she is the Queen.

Is it a nod to her finishing move? Sure, but it's still referring to Charlotte as being the queen. Having your nickname incorporated into one of your moves is common enough. Edge (wrestler) has the "Edgecution" for example.

Your saying "shortly followed by" is misleading because while "to the" is short, "-ing down to her. Sasha might be the Boss but she is" isn't particularly short. Plus that's "Bowing" not "Bow".

Also considering this:

The Boss bows to “the queen.”

Even if this is still a nod to Charlotte's move name, her move is not named "the queen", so Sasha is not bowing to Charlotte's finisher, she's bowing to Charlotte, aka "The Queen".

Where is "bow" in these four?

  1. Taylor, Scott (26 May 2015). "'The Four Horsewomen' of NXT: Sasha Banks, Charlotte, Bayley and Becky Lynch on how they're changing women's wrestling". CHARLOTTE: Honestly, people ask all the time if we feel pressure to deliver, or do we feel pressure from people putting us in these positions. But I don't think any of us feel the pressure, just because we're able to lean on each other. I don't know how to explain it; you all know what I mean? Watch: .. The Queen vs. The Boss
  2. Trionfo, Richard (November 30, 2015). "WWE RAW REPORT: A NEW GROUP IS FORMED, IS THE QUEEN OF THE JUNGLE SHOWING HER TRUE STRIPES?, ARE THE NEW DAY TURNING INTO J&J SECURITY FOR SHEAMUS?, A FEW RETURNS, AND MORE". PWInsider. p. 3. Retrieved November 30, 2015. Charlotte appears to have hurt her ankle. Charlotte kips up and she gets the rollup and three count while Ric distracts Becky.
  3. "Come at the Queen". 15 February 2016. Brie's Divas Championship Match with Charlotte at WWE Fastlane has taken on new meaning .. Charlotte was free to build momentum with a second victory over Alicia Fox
  4. "Sasha and Charlotte are on the move in the WWE Power Rankings". 16 July 2016. the-boss-and-the-queen-are-on-the-move-in-the-wwe-power-rankings

I don't see "bow" in these. Just "The Queen" consistently being used to refer to Charlotte from May 2015 to July 2016. Ranze (talk) 10:22, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Here's some more:

Is all this going to be dismissed too? Ranze (talk) 10:51, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I call myself King but that doesn't make it my nickname. I reclaim my throne when I come home from work, doesn't make me king. Nothing says it's a nickname, sorry don't see it can't agree with it. Chris "WarMachineWildThing" (talk) 11:05, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Chris please stop addressing sources in isolation. I'm not making an argument to call Charlotte "The Queen" just because she does that. In addition to her, Ric Flair calls her that, WWE.com articles call her that, announcers call her that, and third party reviewers call her that. What special kind of criteria besides these types do you tend to rely on to support nicknames for wrestlers? Ranze (talk) 19:30, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I have problems with most of your sources, from those that are directly describing her hitting her finishing move, to those that probably are talking about Sasha Banks taking it (every source that says Boss vs Queen). The source from this diff, I think, is the strongest one you've provided so far actually. It is third party, reliable and quotes her directly talking about herself. This could be, and has been so far, dismissed as an offhand remark rather than a reoccurring nickname though. I'm interested to hear what others besides Chris and I think of the Twitter and Facebook sources Ranze provided and to see if those clarify that "The Queen" is truly a nickname.LM2000 (talk) 12:04, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
LM2000 do you really "The Boss vs The Queen" is referring to "Sasha versus Charlotte's finishing move" instead of "Sasha vs Charlotte"? Really? Have you ever heard the "Bow Down To The Queen" shortened to "The Queen"? If that move was ever going to be abbreviated it would be to "Bown Down" since that is the action-verb of the move and "the queen" is merely providing context as to who the victim is bowing down to (Charlotte). Thank you for acknowledging at least one of these sources. Facebook/Twitter are just to provide additional references, the best source is probably the statements directly on WWE.com referring to her as The Queen. Ranze (talk) 19:30, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Ranze: let's go through this again, earlier this year, you created a re-direct for Dean Ambrose from Iron Man of the WWE. The re-direct was deleted, because why? Oh yeah, just like this, Dean called himself that, ONE TIME. The name of a move means jack @#%$ until the name is applied to the wrestler, on a regular basis. I would be fine with the name being added, if only he ad become a regular name first and you wouldn't hear it and say "Hey, I gotta add this to Wikipedia before someone else" after only one reference. CrashUnderride 15:53, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Crash this is not an appropriate place for you to vent your personal vendetta against me that is leading you to disrupt this article. You are making false statements to support your narrative here and I think you should recuse yourself until you've actually checked the references and/or are willing to be honest about their contents. I've supplied about a dozen references by this point, not "one" as you incorrectly state. Charlotte refers to herself repeatedly as 'the queen' on her official facebook, WWE.com refers to her repeatedly as 'the queen' in pages I have linked above, third party reviewers also call her this. Ranze (talk) 19:30, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Wha, wha wha, every critizims and attack. Grow up, follow the guidlines and stop your disruptive edits. CrashUnderride 01:27, 26 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Oh and @Ranze: my only "vendetta" against you is when you instance to include "nicknames" that aren't notable and names that are obscure Talk:Cameron (wrestler)#Requested move 22 August 2016 and your constant lying by providing "sources" that mention nothing about what your using them to source. So there, that's my "vendetta" for everyone to see. Now please, stop whining and crying and provide the proper sources. CrashUnderride 01:32, 26 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Crash Underride: you are disrupting the process of community discussion by mischaracterizing the sources I'm giving you. This is not an appropiate place to make personal attacks on me. Cameron's full name and Dean Ambrose's nicknames have nothing to do with Charlotte (wrestler). You can bring that up on the wikiproject or complain about it to admins or something.

I have provided proper sources, and those who have opted to honestly review them like LM2000 have acknowledged this even if still on the fence as to whether we agree on their importance. If you invite any third parties to come evaluate these sources they will plainly see that every source I've introduced is related to the association between Charlotte and "The Queen". Some indirectly (the ones referencing the "Bown Down to the Queen" move) and some directly (Charlotte being called "The Queen").

I have never lied here, and if you get that impression, you may not understand the context in which I have presented some of the sources, such as the indirect-support 'bown down' couple. Ranze (talk) 01:47, 26 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Well here's how we can stop these situations from arising; wait and see if a nickname stays before rushing to add it like you have with Iron Man of the WWE and (how it's a redirect is beyond me) Radical Mongoose. Only then will I WP:AGF when it comes to you. So, yes, when I see you've editted a page I cringe and expect you to have added information that's not notable. CrashUnderride 01:53, 26 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Marriage references

[edit]

I have introduced a couple template:unreliable source? templates to the date ranges given here and I don't think they should be removed until we have updated out sources. We presently do have sources but they do not support all the numbers given.

The side template says (m. 2010; div. 2012) for Johnson and (m. 2013; div. 2015) for Latimer. Both are probably true. I assume good faith and whoever added them probably did get them from a reliable source but just didn't include it.

The sources we actually include which mention the marriage are these:

  1. Aquino, Denise (July 26, 2015). "5 Things You Probably Didn't Know About Charlotte Flair". Geekend Gladiators. Charlotte was married to Riki Johnson. The couple got married in North Carolina last May 2010 .. Right now, she is still currently married to Thomas Raymond Latimer
  2. Ahmed, Tufayel (October 6, 2014). "TNA Wrestling's Bram on his famous father in-law Ric Flair: 'It's not something you think about, it feels normal'". Daily Mirror. Retrieved October 16, 2014.
  3. Johnson, Mike (November 3, 2015). "Charlotte-Bram update". Pro Wrestling Insider. Retrieved November 3, 2015. That divorce was finalized in the State of Florida on 10/29.

The first source affirms the month/year she married Johnson but does not mention what year they divorced. We still need a source to affirm that they divorced in 2012.

The second and first source affirms that she was presently married to Latimer during the time of each article's publication (October 2014 and July 2015) but neither mentions when they got married, we still need a source affirming that 2013 was the year they were married.

The third source affirms the date that she and Latimer were divorced (October 2015) but nothing about when the marriage began, or when she and Johnson divorced.

So basically, we need sources to support the "divorced Johnson 2012" and the "married Latimer 2013" stats. If this data is presently available in a reference currently here then we need to alias it and cite it. Only the "married Johnson 2010" and "divorced Latimer 2015" stats are supported right now by the cites. Ranze (talk) 19:50, 25 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Update: @Dalton Imperial: was right about the Orange Country Compttroller, I just added that to support the 2013 marriage to Latimer, now the only source missing is the 2012 divorce date to Johnson. Perhaps if we could find out what state it happened in we could find a similar Comptroller log for it? Ranze (talk) 20:00, 25 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

If I am reading these correctly all that is missing is the divorce from Johnson. So if we were to break everything down she could have divorced him anytime between 2010 and 2013. Am I correct in assuming that it is not known where they were living when married, alot of divorces can be found in court records if we knew what state. Chris "WarMachineWildThing" (talk) 22:00, 25 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 29 October 2016

[edit]
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Moved to Charlotte Flair. Consensus was that recent sources and WWE events use the new name. It's also a natural disambiguator. -- Patar knight - chat/contributions 17:29, 21 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Charlotte (wrestler) → Charlotte Flair – As with Natalya Neidhart, WP:NATDAB would have applied anyway, but should be moved per WP:NAMECHANGES as this is what she is being billed as now.[1] LM2000 (talk) 20:45, 29 October 2016 (UTC) --Relisting. Bradv 03:18, 7 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

WWE establishes it as her ring name. Maybe we should wait till media calls her "Flair". This will be similar when Emmalina returns. --wL<speak·check> 22:06, 29 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
It remains to be seen. WWE has flip-flopped before. But, of course, WP must be quicker. Str1977 (talk) 22:13, 29 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

*Oppose - She's known as Charlotte atm so we should stick with it until sources and the media state otherwise. –Davey2010Talk 00:18, 30 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

She actually was introduced as simply "Charlotte" at Hell In A Cell, which IMO counts more than a few interns at WWE.com adding the surname and a couple of sites reporting on wrestling parroting that. Str1977 (talk) 14:15, 1 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

SUPPORT It was on numerous sites that she was adding Flair to her name. Chris "WarMachineWildThing" Talk to me 08:42, 30 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

That's not what I said. I said that we need confirmation, such as a Hell in a Cell results page or the ring announcer to call her "Charlotte Flair." I didn't say that it'll be dropped over time. JTP (talk • contribs) 20:23, 30 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

WWE.com is a main source, Wikipedia is founded on sources. The fact there are so many solid sources and this is still going on is insane. Chris "WarMachineWildThing" Talk to me 02:05, 4 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

One thing I missed, but Silverfish pointed out on Talk:Hell in a Cell (2016), was that her official social media accounts are using the full name: [6], [7], [8]. There seems to be little doubt that this is the full name of the wrestling character. I'm not sure if it matters that they don't call her by her first and last name every time she comes to the ring.LM2000 (talk) 02:11, 4 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
This is like Xavier Woods still saying "…your WWE World Tag Team Champions," even though the championship is referred to as the Raw Tag Team Championship now. Jay Coop · Talk · Contributions 05:43, 4 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
If you think WWE.com, which is primarily in-universe/fictional ongoings is a reliable/main source, then you have a lot to learn about how research works. Idenitor (talk) 16:28, 4 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Idenitor: Please read WP:PW/RS. WWE.com is a reliable source. Jay Coop · Talk · Contributions 19:34, 4 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • SUPPORT Should already be moved, but to add my two cents, essentially all official sources are using "Charlotte Flair" now, including WWE themselves (as noted multiple times above). They've gone as far as listing her as "Charlotte Flair" on the Raw Women's Championship title history, even for her first two reigns when she was just "Charlotte". The argument that the announcers haven't called her "Charlotte Flair" is silly. Ring announcers often use the short name. --JDC808 ♫ 04:56, 7 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I don't get your change, JTP. You said above "Oppose until Hell in a Cell (2016), we need in-ring confirmation" - at HIAC we had in-ring information and the Flair surname was nowhere to be found, least of all during Charlotte's entrance. Str1977 (talk) 15:47, 10 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
They already dropped the Flair moniker for a week now. The last two Raw episodes, she was referred to as Charlotte. DantODB 06:14, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
I wouldn't go as far to say that it's been dropped, but it definitely hasn't been used on TV on a regular basis yet. Even the TV graphics just say "Charlotte". This discussion has already gone 7 days, I'd close it and call it no consensus. You can't jump the gun on this stuff. There's no harm right now in the page name just being "Charlotte (wrestler)". Idenitor (talk) 17:04, 9 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Look at the official sources, including WWE.com, and all of her social media pages. It's "Charlotte Flair". Just because they don't call her by her full name every week doesn't automatically mean they've "already dropped" it. --JDC808 ♫ 06:22, 8 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Here's a WWE.com article that used "Charlotte Flair" two hours ago. This name hasn't been dropped.LM2000 (talk) 06:36, 8 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
It's not that they don't use the supposed full name all the time - they have actually just for about a week. Now it doesn't exist outside of badly written wwe.com pieces. And no, they're not the most reliable kind of sources. Wrestling is all a show and the shows are what counts. Str1977 (talk) 15:49, 10 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Now it doesn't exist outside of badly written wwe.com pieces, From today:PWinsider, from yesterday:Wrestling Observer, from Tuesday:PWinsiderWrestleview.LM2000 (talk) 17:13, 10 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I was referring to WWE publications. Dirtsheets obviously copy what they hear and read. But one never hears that surname anymore. Str1977 (talk) 18:10, 10 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment This discussion should be closed as a "no consensus". There's no need to rush into things and change the article name to something that's only been occasionally used primarily on WWE's website for a few weeks. The page name is fine as it is. There's a Charlotte Flair redirect, and that's fine as well. Idenitor (talk) 03:57, 11 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • There's more support than opposition and your implication that this is an obscure name not reflected in reliable sources is wrong. If reviewing admin requires more input, relist rather than close as no consensus at this point.LM2000 (talk) 04:41, 11 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
It's pretty split, and these discussions aren't votes. Just because there might be a few more "support" comments than "oppose" doesn't mean there is consensus. A lot of the "support" comments have pretty flimsy evidence and are from users who don't understand policies here. There's already a "Charlotte Flair" redirect. She's been known simply as "Charlotte" a vast majority of her career, and still is on-screen. Don't really see a need to change the page name right now. Idenitor (talk) 19:53, 11 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Let me just note that I used "dirtsheets" in the technical wrestling sense, e.g. Meltzer's Wrestling Observer or the Pro Wrestling Torch. There was no judgement implied. However, my point remains that Charlotte has been called "Flair" on televised shows for about a week or two and not on the latest PPV. IMO, this outweighs the articles that use the surname at least in regard to the issue at hand. Str1977 (talk) 09:36, 12 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support She is the daughter of Ric Flair and she has two ring names: Charlotte and Charlotte Flair. And because of that it needs to be Charlotte Flair. WWE has even recognised this change. Like at Hell in a Cell (2016), they posted a video in which she was called Charlotte Flair. And all the websites affirmed her name is Charlotte Flair.GeniusBoy2005 08:43 , 12 November 2016 (UTC)
  • Why does the page name "need to be Charlotte Flair"? I think a "Charlotte Flair" redirect is sufficient for now. They've barely used the last name it on TV and in the last few weeks, haven't said "Flair" at all. In the latest Wrestling Observer newsletter, there is a line in the Raw recap "For those who pay attention to these things, this week, they’ve decided to drop the Flair from Charlotte’s name, so it was like a one or two week deal." Idenitor (talk) 09:33, 12 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The website makes it clear that it hasn't been dropped. And it allows us to avoid a parenthetical disambiguator, which is preferred practice at all times, unless the non-parenthetical version is too obscure. Clearly, this case, where the naturally disambiguated version is presently used on a regular basis by WWE.com, is not obscure, and so is necessary by Wikipedia guidelines. That's why is "needs to be" at Charlotte Flair. oknazevad (talk) 03:23, 13 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Mick Foley just called her CHARLOTTE FLAIR on Monday Night RAW at 8:05pm, sooooo now it's been on several different reliable sites and RAW. Clearly they are not giving up on it. Chris "WarMachineWildThing" Talk to me 02:19, 15 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

JoJo also introduced her as Charlotte. The name on the screen also said Charlotte. DantODB 07:57, 15 November 2016 (UTC)
It still shows that the name is in use and has not been dropped. Although they may refer to her as "Charlotte", they also regularly refer to her as "Charlotte Flair". WWE officially call her Charlotte Flair and it is best to have the article at Charlotte Flair to avoid disambiguation. Sekyaw (talk) 01:39, 16 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
There's already a "Charlotte Flair" redirect. I think that suffices for now. A vast majority of the time, she's only called "Charlotte" on television. I think this discussion should be closed as a no consensus and we wait a few months to see what develops. Idenitor (talk) 05:03, 16 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Why have the redirect when the article can just be titled "Charlotte Flair"? --JDC808 ♫ 18:38, 16 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Just because there is a redirect, it doesn't mean that it is sufficient. Jay Coop · Talk · Contributions 18:48, 16 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The Charlotte Flair name has only been used inconsistently for less than a month. Let's see if it'll stick before rushing into moving the page. DantODB 22:29, 16 November 2016 (UTC)
Despite the fact that ALL of her WWE related articles use "Charlotte Flair". --JDC808 ♫ 04:49, 17 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
It's only been for a few weeks. I think what happens on TV trumps what they do on the website. I think the redirect and mention of "Charlotte or Charlotte Flair" will suffice for now. Idenitor (talk) 09:32, 17 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Idenitor: No, whenever it is optimal to drop "wrestler" from an article title, it is sufficient to move the article. Look at Natalya Neidhart; the article is not titled "Natalya (wrestler)". Jay Coop · Talk · Contributions 18:24, 17 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
My daughter just showed me they have changed her name on the Official WWE trading card app SLAM! to Charlotte Flair now aswell. Good point btw @JayCoop:. Chris "WarMachineWildThing" Talk to me 00:07, 18 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Yes it has happened. Plenty of reliable sources are using "Charlotte Flair". Regardless if people think of her as just "Charlotte", they would immediately know who "Charlotte Flair" is over "Charlotte (wrestler)". --JDC808 ♫ 01:31, 27 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Not to mention if another Charlotte pops up in professional wrestling. Are you just gonna do "Charlotte (wrestler, born xxxx)" like Steve Smith (wide receiver, born 1985), for example? Charlotte Flair would be the suitable title of the article. I'm gonna bring up Natalya Neidhart again, because she's only referred to as "Natalya" in WWE, but the article is not titled "Natalya (wrestler)". Jay Coop · Talk · Contributions 02:07, 27 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
That was another point I was gonna bring up, but I wasn't sure if WWE got the complete rights to the ring name "Charlotte", so I didn't mention it. --JDC808 ♫ 23:50, 27 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I don't expect them to stop using "Charlotte", it's still the first name of the character. Characters in fiction are rarely addressed by their full name every time they are mentioned.LM2000 (talk) 02:53, 27 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Another good point. --JDC808 ♫ 23:50, 27 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, but this is different from other people who are often known by their first names, in that the "Flair" is a relatively new addition, and hasn't universally caught on yet. Fundamentally, this current title is much more WP:RECOGNIZEable than the new one - nobody would be in doubt as to what it refers to, whether they've heard of the Flair name or not, whereas the proposed title is unnecessary and confusing.  — Amakuru (talk) 12:30, 29 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
"Hasn't caught on yet"? Where have you been? She's been referred to as "Charlotte Flair" even before all of her WWE articles and social media were changed to "Charlotte Flair". I disagree that the current title is more recognizable. "Charlotte Flair" is MUCH more recognizable due to the fact that she's Ric FLAIR's daughter. For that simple fact alone, readers are going to immediately recognize "Charlotte Flair" over "Charlotte (wrestler)". "Charlotte Flair" is in no way confusing, and actually eliminates any confusion. --JDC808 ♫ 18:41, 29 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Might I suggest infuture that you join in with discussions first instead of BOLDLY moving something especially when there's a notice that clearly states "It has been requested that the title of this article be changed to Charlotte Flair. Please see the relevant discussion on the discussion page. Do not move the page until the discussion has reached consensus for the change and is closed.". –Davey2010Talk 23:57, 29 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Aye, but no offense. I'm sure it'll get moved soon anyway. Move it with flair!PeterMan844 (talk) 00:01, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Not the point my fiend - We have policies and guidelines for a reason and plus consensus can change at the last minute (it's happened on a few of these rms). –Davey2010Talk 00:04, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
"Charlotte is now more identified as Charlotte Flair" - no, she isn't. Another Raw just went by and I don't recall any talk of "Charlotte Flair", despite Ric Flair even appearing at the end. Str1977 (talk) 00:17, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Interview with comments about her now being Charlotte Flair: [12] Not sure what else we need, they aren't going to stop calling her 'Charlotte' since it's her first name but using the full name for the article title is clearly better than a disambiguation. 86.3.174.49 (talk) 20:21, 2 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
For the tldr folks:

On being billed as Charlotte Flair now instead of Charlotte: Obviously we haven’t shied away from being my dad’s daughter, but I think it was the company’s way of saying she can do it and she can own it. And that’s pretty cool. It’s weird to have two names now. It makes for a longer [autograph] signing. My hand’s cramping more. [laughs] But I think it was cool the company was putting that much thought into my growth and my character. It really does make a difference.

--JDC808 ♫ 02:08, 3 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Think it would be best to close this as a no consensus, wait a bit and make a new discussion. Even with some sparingly used web mentions, 99% of the time she is only known on-screen as "Charlotte" and NOT "Charlotte Flair". Cesaro's page isn't titled "Antonio Cesaro", for instance. Idenitor (talk) 21:13, 2 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • 13-8 is decisive enough to close with consensus to move. Most of the oppose !votes came early on, the longer this goes on the more it will tip in favor of the move.LM2000 (talk) 21:21, 2 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Antonio Cesaro" was a short-lived name that was dropped years ago, it's not a comparable situation. Charlotte will continue to be referred to as "Charlotte" on-air most of the time because that's her name, just like Sasha Banks is mostly referred to as "Sasha" and not "Sasha Banks" every time anyone mentions her. Charlotte's WWE profile says Charlotte Flair, she is introduced as Charlotte Flair, I just posted an interview where she talks about how she's now Charlotte Flair rather than just Charlotte. Needlessly retaining a disambiguation rather than her full ring name makes no sense in this situation. 86.3.174.49 (talk) 22:43, 2 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Except that Sasha is introduced as Sasha Banks and her name card on programming says Sasha Banks. I think it's still a transition for the Charlotte Flair name, as she is still introduced as Charlotte and her name card says that. Wait a little longer. The name has only been used less than two months. It could turn into the Cesaro situation. It could not. We'll see. DantODB 01:15, 3 December 2016 (UTC)
Then explain Natalya Neidhart. --JDC808 ♫ 04:36, 6 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support WWE has been constantly referring to her on the air in recent weeks as Charlotte Flair, and recent WWE.com YouTube videos here and here have her listed as Charlotte Flair. A performer's stage name change seems to fit WP:NAMECHANGES. - SanAnMan (talk) 18:24, 6 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. A few things are clear here: (1) that within wrestling, her name has been changed to "Charlotte Flair", and (2) that reliable sources published since that time (and well before) routinely refer to her by the new name. "Charlotte Flair" returns 37,700 Google News hits. This includes quality, third-party published sources like the Orlando Sentinel, Charlotte Observer, Inquisitr, Orlando WESH, and International Business Times, to name a few I found in just a few seconds. Given that we should give more weight to sources published after a name change, per WP:NAMECHANGE, and the fact that natural disambiguation is generally preferable where available, this seems pretty clear-cut.--Cúchullain t/c 20:48, 6 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment The move request page says "as this is what she is being billed as now", that's not the case and is misleading to users who may not follow wrestling. I watched Raw last night, Michael Cole said "Charlotte Flair" once, and every other time, she was just "Charlotte". Still called "Charlotte" on-screen, ring announcer still calls her just "Charlotte". It's a secondary name, even within WWE. The page name should just stick to what she is generally called, not going off some wishy-washy surname that's only used on main television programming on occasion. Idenitor (talk) 05:37, 7 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Idenitor: All of her WWE.com articles and social media have been changed to "Charlotte Flair", which has been mentioned numerous times in this discussion. WWE has went as far as changing her name to "Charlotte Flair" on the Raw Women's Championship title history page, despite her ring name being Charlotte during her first two reigns. I bring that point up because Hulk Hogan, for example, is listed with both of his ring names on the WWE World Championship's title history: Hulk Hogan during his first five reigns and Hollywood Hulk Hogan for his sixth reign. Also, take note of this. --JDC808 ♫ 09:45, 7 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Idenitor & JDC808: what actually matters most is use in reliable sources. It is abundantly clear that reliable sources are referring to her as "Charlotte Flair".--Cúchullain t/c 17:48, 7 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Once again, they are not going to stop calling her "Charlotte" because it is her name. The fact that Michael Cole did not refer to her by her full name every time he mentioned her on commentary is a ridiculous argument, the fact that they even mentioned Charlotte Flair once on the broadcast in addition to the numerous sourced mentions online should be enough. Consensus is now 17-9 in favor of moving, and in the past month it's 11-2.86.3.174.49 (talk) 20:58, 7 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Add Bow Down to The Queen as the NXT name for Natural Selection

[edit]

It was the name of her somersault cutter on from her NXT debut and at least until she won the NXT Women's Championship at NXT Takeover. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Grizzexploder (talk • contribs) 09:40, 31 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Pay per view wins?

[edit]

It states in the article that Charlotte hasn't lost any matches on pay per views, however, she lost at Battleground 2016. So that information is inaccurate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:587:2:F27E:D8AE:CC20:17B6:8ED7 (talk) 07:11, 1 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You're right. I removed the claim. Str1977 (talk) 16:55, 1 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
She has not lost any singles matches at pay-per-views. --JDC808 ♫ 18:37, 1 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
That might be so but is that really a feat notable enough to warrant inclusion into the intro. Keep in mind that she has been losing a lot outside of PPVs, has been in quite a number of tag team matches on PPV. There certainly is a way this can be worded accurately (but before I mistakenly changed it was just gibberish) but I don't think it's worth the trouble. Str1977 (talk) 16:12, 2 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
WWE made a big deal out of it when she beat Sasha at Hell in a Cell. They're praising it as a new streak. I don't know if the intro is the right place, but maybe somewhere. --JDC808 ♫ 02:02, 3 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not dead set against mention it somewhere but then again, neither are we obliged to parrot everything WWE makes a big deal out of it, especially since it's practically non-existent. Never having lost a match would be noteworthy, never having lost a match on a certain even in many years as well, even never having lost a match on PPV. But never having lost a singles match on PPV (so a dually qualified statement, removing a large chunk of PPV matches and the far greater number of non-PPV matches from the equation) over a very short time (it's been little more than year) is basically hot air. Str1977 (talk) 22:46, 4 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 7 December 2016

[edit]

Change her surname from Fleihr to Flair which is her fathers name that was also given to her 95.87.30.124 (talk) 13:22, 7 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: Her last name is properly sourced, and is listed as Fleihr. The article also mentions that she goes by Flair, but that is not her legal name. 🔯 Sir Joseph 🍸(talk) 14:53, 7 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Heel or not?

[edit]

Is Charlotte a heel or not? Because after her supposed heel turn at Survivor Series, she beat down The IIconics. --CEDJunior (talk) 04:40, 22 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Current partner

[edit]

Mention her current partner . Rk73520 (talk) 13:37, 22 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Partner Andrade Cien almas Rk73520 (talk) 13:40, 22 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Trainers

[edit]

Trainers are already mentioned above on the list, no need to specifically name them on the main body, no other wrestlers have names of their trainers listed on the main body, just named on the list, so changed that, its unnecessary details. Just focus on her main debut on 2012-2014 early career section.Dilbaggg (talk) 13:59, 13 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

All content that is in the infobox (assuming that is what you mean by "above on the list"), should be included in the article body. I would call that a problem if you do not see the training detailed in other wrestlers articles. The training of a professional wrestler is important and should be included. Most of all though, if it is in the infobox, it should also be in the article. StaticVapor message me! 16:13, 13 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Charlotte is still a RAW Superstar according to WWE

[edit]

According to WWE.com, Charlotte is still a RAW Superstar even though she holds an NXT Title. Please change her back to RAW until WWE confirms that brand change. https://www.wwe.com/superstars/charlotte-flair — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.236.80.152 (talk) 13:01, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Main Image Replacement

[edit]

Accordting WP:IMGCONTENT "The purpose of an image is to increase readers' understanding of the article's subject matter, usually by directly depicting people, things, activities, and concepts described in the article. The relevant aspect of the image should be clear and central. Guidance for selecting images when multiple potential images are available can be found at Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Images, keeping in mind that Wikipedia desires freely licensed images over non-free ones when they otherwise serve the same educational purpose." I attempted to post a career image and it was reverted by 2 other editors user:PedigreeWWEFigz87V2 and user:Megppg99. I am going to post it one more time. Please do not revert, unless you dissuss here first and provide a better reason than above. Carl Carter X (talk) 00:55, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The photo has copyright, so we can't use it. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 10:45, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The photo does not have copyright, it was released on Flickr by the copyright holder. I have checked it. 23.240.192.112 (talk) 20:56, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I highly doubt it. Who is the Flickr user? Releasing a picture doesn't mean it's copyright free. These kind of renders are a very high quality ones, most surely, owned by WWE. Also, it was uploaded months before to DevianArt. [13] --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 08:03, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 28 June 2022

[edit]

Add Megan Thompson to Relatives, Megan Thompson is Charlotte's sister, Ric Flair is their father, Megan Thompson is the wife of Conrad Thompson who is Charlotte's Brother-In-Law 172.112.203.42 (talk) 10:21, 28 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Also, non-notable relatives are normally not named. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 10:50, 28 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 4 April 2023

[edit]
2601:704:100:9130:30F7:43C4:6456:8DDB (talk) 01:07, 4 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Her debut was July 7th 2013 not July 7th 2012

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. The person who loves reading (talk) 02:49, 4 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 11 May 2023

[edit]

Please change the photo. There are far more appealing and accurate photos of what Charlotte looks like. The portrait of her currently used results in people commenting negatively on her looks and making fun of her. It is also 4 years old. 99.144.168.49 (talk) 06:43, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: Neither Flair's opinions on the photo nor those of the people allegedly making fun of her for it are relevant here.
More importantly, photos on Wikipedia need to comply with the image use policy, which limits what media can be used. If you have a suggestion either for a file already hosted on Wikimedia Commons or for a picture that meets the relevant copyright requirements that would be better, please provide that as an alternative. Actualcpscm (talk) 10:40, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Are fight feature for this week

[edit]

Her fight for this weekend 102.89.22.200 (talk) 09:53, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Talk:Charlotte_Flair&oldid=1257765104"