Talk:WWE ECW: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 06:14, 11 November 2007

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the WWE ECW article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4

Television Start‑class Low‑importance

	Television portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles about television programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join the discussion. To improve this article, please refer to the style guidelines for the type of work.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Professional wrestling Start‑class Low‑importance

	WWE ECW is within the scope of WikiProject Professional wrestling, an attempt to improve and standardize articles related to professional wrestling. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, visit the project to-do page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to discussions.Professional wrestlingWikipedia:WikiProject Professional wrestlingTemplate:WikiProject Professional wrestlingProfessional wrestling
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

archive one

archive two (2006)

archive three (2007)

famous or bodies

is the theme? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.149.101.186 (talk • contribs)

The fact that "Bodies" has been the opening theme since ECW came back last June, what do you think? TJ Spyke 02:40, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Last night's show had Famous playing throughout (which was the theme for One Night Stand a month ago), so it may have changed. WTStoffs 17:26, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

But there is no proof it's the new theme since they didn't even HAVE an opening theme last night. I can't change it back yet though without violating 3RR. Officially, the opening theme is still "Bodies". TJ Spyke 22:06, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

thank you Wtstoffs. well it should be mentioned that it was used — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.225.14.56 (talk • contribs)

Well just wait until next week to see which song they use in the opening. Y2J RKO 23:26, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

- They wouldn't change it cause their intro flows around "Bodies". If they changed it they'd have to redo the whole intro. I don't think they'd do that without a reunion like they did with RAW on October 9th, 2006!-- Hornetman16 06:20, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

They change the intro videos from week to week anyway. They have lots people that they pay to change this stuff, and they have whole week to change it. The Hybrid 14:41, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think they may have changed it. Why? "Bodies" seems distasteful at this point with the Benoit Family Tragedy. They found their bodies in three different rooms. Also with that said, Chris Benoit was in ECW before his demise. So I'm guessing they are changing it. Come Tuesday, We'll see if they do change it or not. -- Jลмєs Mลxx™ Msg me 11:26, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's possible. They stopped using "Bodies" as the entrance theme of Stephanie McMahon/The Alliance right after 9/11 (although WWE claimed that wasn't the reason). As of right now though, there is no proof that it isn't still the offical theme. TJ Spyke 03:58, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Last night on RAW, there was a preview for ECW with the general theme being Bodies while ECW wrestlers were being spotlighted.darthbob 21:48, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tonight, they used the old ECW theme (the one used by the ECW Originals as well) for the show. TJ Spyke 02:00, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As of the July 3, 2007 episode, I am assuming they are no using the 'Bodies' theme as it was no where on the broadcast, and will just use the ECW theme from this point forward. It was even on the opening video. mwilkison 05:21, 4 July 2007

Is this why the page is now protected? I would hate to see you do that over such a small thing as that. - Desmond Hobson 23:19, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It was protected last week because a couple of people kept changing the theme song to "Famous" even though they didn't have any proof. TJ Spyke 23:29, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have a suggestion, leave it blank for now. They just used ANOTHER theme this week. We should wait for them to use the same theme for 2 weeks in a row before adding it. Lrrr IV 02:17, 11 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

announcers?

I could have swore that there was another announcer for ECW One Night Stand 2006, and for the beginning of ECW, I just can't recall his name. Should this be reflected on the article? 71.249.69.243 00:23, 13 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't recall any other announcer, maybe it was the original ECW announcer. Either way, it doesn't affect this article since the ECW brand didn't officially kick off until the Tuesday after ONS 2006. Lrrr IV 00:57, 13 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

None for ONS 06 that I know of. For about a two week period, Brad Armstrong was used for a three man team, just in case Tazz didn't resign and they were left with one announcer. That obviouslly didn't happen, and Armstrong was dropped. He was awful as a commentator anyway. Projectmayhem44 07:16, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mick Foley was at ONS05. Mshake3 00:26, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

commentators

Referee Scott Armstrong was a commentator for the ECW brand for a couple of weeks, providing a 3 man booth with Joey Styles and Tazz early this year or late last year, I know this for a fact. How come this isn't shown? -- Shatterzer0 23:39, 18 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Because it wasn't Scott, it was Brad. That's a fact. Projectmayhem44 07:17, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Split ECW on Sci Fi

I believe ECW on Sci Fi deserves it's own article since it's a Show.--Hornetman16 ^(talk) 19:59, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So are RAW and SmackDown!, but both articles are about the brand as a whole and the show it's represented by.«»bd(^talk _stalk) 20:29, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There is no need for a split and having looked closely I refer you to archive 1, where a merge discussion took place when this was two articles. Darrenhusted 08:38, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

keeep the way it is - it's both the brand and the show just like Raw & Smackdown, no need to tinker with it if it's not broken. MPJ-DK 14:14, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose, for now at any rate. The ECW brand doesn't have house shows or exclusive pay-per-views. The brand begins and ends with ECW on Sci Fi and its cast. McPhail 15:09, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose, good god... -- bulletproof ^3:16 21:31, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I dunno if this is the same thing, but isn't iMPACT! split from TNA? --SteelersFan UK06 09:58, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That stems from the fact that in the past TNA have had other TV shows, they have house shows occationally as well - with ECW the "brand" consists of "ECW on Sci Fi" and the couple of "ECW only" PPVs they've had. MPJ-DK 10:33, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Aah, ok, I see. keep 'em here then. --SteelersFan UK06 10:40, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose, come on, can't you think of something better to do with your time? If someone wanted to know what ECW on Sci Fi was after watching an episode on TV, for instance, they may search on wikipedia or google, reach this page, and they certainly would not need to be redirected to a second page on the show itself. I'm sure an article about ECW on Sci Fi would have to incorporate the history of the show, and I see the overly ambitious move to expand and create new articles, as well as create one specifically for the show, as an attempt to create a new page for spoilers, current updates, and wrestling news. Just write about ECW, and if you don't have anything notable to write about the WWE's ECW brand, don't think creating a new page will help.

--Screwball23 talk 04:45, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Roster

I dunno where to add this on the page but i think it is noteable that according to the WWE website ECW only has a roster of 13 active wrestlers. See here. Thanks George bennett 19:06, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I fail to see how that's notable. It's more like 11 though, Striker is a manager now and Cor Von is inactive. Gavyn Sykes 19:28, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

armondo estrada

is the ecw GM

Noted.-- bulletproof ^3:16 02:10, 15 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Theme song?

So what is the official ECW theme song? It seems like it changes everyweek.

If we knew, it would already be in there. And yes, you're right, it does change seemingly everyweek. Mshake3 03:26, 25 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just added it. Rollinman 00:31, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Meltzer

Actually, User:Bdve, Meltzer is a source and has been used on numerous other wrestling related wiki pages as such. The Rypcord. 15:35, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree it should be, it's under discussion, but certain users wil remove it immediately.«»bd(^talk _stalk) 16:55, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I took a look at your edits, and he was right. You provided no source for your edits, they were full of speculation (speculating on why WWE is having this talent exchange). Even if it's Meltzer who says that, it still wouldn't be included because it would just be his opinion (not fact) on why it's happening. TJ Spyke 23:01, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Special Episodes

Shuld we have a section on special episodes (Ex: The Halloween Episode)??? GD1223 —Preceding comment was added at 11:55, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know if last nights episode would be considered a special episode. WWE has done this before (like for the Christmas 1997 episode of RAW). I wouldn't mind hearing others thoughts though. TJ Spyke 22:11, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No it's not needed. Last night wasn't really a special episode, It aired at it's regular time on it's regular channel. It was a themed episode.Aladdin Zane 02:04, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I also agree that it was just a "theme", but couldn't we briefly mention it? I mean, Nunzio went trick-or-treating with kids and there was an Extreme Rules Match using pies and apples in water...so is it at least worth mentioning?--Lord Dagon 19:18, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I suppose, I did enjoy seeing Tommy Dreamer dressed up as Paul Heyman (and Tazz/Styles pretending not to know). TJ Spyke 22:04, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

mentioning the themed episode seems ok, but it doesn't need a new section for it.Aladdin Zane 00:30, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the only thing is, would I need to cite it or would it appearing on television be enough?--Lord Dagon 18:09, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Citing should be done when possible and I woudl recommennd it here. There is Template:Cite episode, or citing a website that talks about it (like wwe.com [1]). TJ Spyke 21:19, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Negotiations

Bdve, are you serious? You don't know what 'negotiations' means? Its what I had posted before... only to get told, "no, thats not true" and have it reverted four times.

The Smackdown-ECW negotiations. If you seriously don't know what that means, I don't know what else to tell you. The Rypcord. 02:01, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What does it mean as in why does it need a subsection to contain one line, which have information that has nothing to do with it?«»bd(^talk _stalk) 14:32, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. It only needs one line, just to say that SmackDown and ECW agreed to a talent exhange. TJ Spyke 22:04, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Theme Song

The theme song has changed yet again! They can't even keep the same one for a month. I think this is the sixth one so far this year. It sounds like a new version of 'Don't Question My Heart". It has the same lyrics but sounds different. Is it sung by a different band or something? Because if it is it needs to be put on the article. Socks 01 06:14, 11 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]