Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Professional wrestling

WikiProject Professional Wrestling
Welcome to the WikiProject Professional wrestling discussion page. Please use this page to discuss issues regarding professional wrestling related articles, project guidelines, ideas, suggestions and questions. Thank you for visiting!

This talk page is automatically archived by User:MiszaBot II. Any sections older than 7 days are automatically archived to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Professional wrestling/Archive 61. Sections without timestamps are not archived.

Roster pages

Watch the roster pages. Also there is a discussion on the TNA Roster page. Someone wants the tables removed from that page because it wasn't discussed there to add them.--WillC 03:29, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

Said user is also currently at ANI, so halt on that. iMatthew 03:40, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

it seems that more and more users do not like the tables.a vote will be needed in the future.but i'm not proposing one now. CMJMEM (talk) 03:43, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

Just because people don't like its appearance, it is no reason to substitute a vote with consensus.--SRX 15:28, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

Keep the tables, just organize by last name. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.27.67.174 (talk) 03:25, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

King of the Ring (1993) passed its GA review

That makes 99 Good Articles for the project...which one will get the project up to 100? GaryColemanFan (talk) 00:50, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

Well we have two under GA review. No Mercy (2007) and No Mercy (2003). It could be either one of those. I know this is a rhetorical question but I'm bored and felt like answering. I for one hope it is one of my three, doubtful but hoping.--WillC 00:55, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

Assuming the numbers were correct beforehand, the passage of No Mercy 03 should have pushed it up to 100. Cheers, DoomsDay 01:46, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

With one more GA ppv article we will have 50 ppv GA articles. Well we already have 50 GA ppvs but I'm excluding FA articles that were once GA. With one more we will have currently 50 GA ppv articles.--WillC 05:40, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Another request for sources

If anyone has Ric Flair's biography, I would really appreciate a little bit of information. He talks about how the original plan for WrestleMania VIII was for him to face Hogan. Can someone please let me know why he says that was changed (with page numbers)? Thanks.

Secondly, on page 161 of Shawn Michaels' autobiography, does he say anything about his match with Santana, or does he just mention that it happened?

In addition, if anyone knows of a reliable source for Marty Jannetty being fired in 1992 for failing a drug test, I would appreciate it if you could point me in the right direction. Thanks again, GaryColemanFan (talk) 23:17, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

For the Shawn Michaels autobiography, it just says that Santana put him over, and that it wasn't a massive win. Thanks, Genius101^Guestbook 23:41, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

Sorry about the delay in replying - P300 of the paperback edition of To Be The Man (Ric Flair)

After the Royal Rumble, the plan had been for me to wrestle Hogan in the setting the match deserved: Wrestlemania VIII, on April 5, 1992, at the Hoosier Dome in Indianapolis. The original storyline would involve me losing to Hogan and giving him the title back. But Vince's relationship with Hogan had deteriorated by then, and Hogan was aspiring to become a full-time actor, so the Wrestlemania VIII lineup was switched around. Hogan would wrestle Sid then take a long sabbatical. I was booked against Randy "Macho Man" Savage.

Hope this helps, I'm adding my books to the library page, anything I have that you need references for, just ask... --Apsouthern (talk) 08:58, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Just so you know no one really checks the library anymore... Thanks, Genius101^Guestbook 18:39, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Question about McMahon-Helmsley Faction

As I looked at the infobox, the names section is a bit cluttered. Are all of those actual names they used, or just fan nicknames? I see Fac-gime, Corporate DX and DX as some of them that seem a bit of a stretch. I don't remember any commentator even calling them those. According to the article: Edge and Christian called the group Fac-gime at least once, which doesn't seem to add notability. Wrestlers call groups things all the time, if we are going by that nonsense: teams have 100s of brief names. RobJ1981 (talk) 20:27, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

I don't remember who, when or why, but Fac-gime was used more than once, it definitely stuck in my head.Fol de rol troll (talk) 17:36, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Championship Tables

The new tables implemented on the WWE Diva's Championship and List of World Heavyweight Championship is unnessicary. A table that can be sorted is not unnessicary, as they're is really no other way that a list of champions can be read other then chronologically.

What I'm trying to suggest is that it's unnessicary to be able to list the events, locations, and the wrestlers name alphabetically in this sort of context. What use does knowing the alphabetical listing of the aforementioned topics actually provide?

Also if this idea gets shot down, I'd also like to suggest that the "Event" list is not required, because a simple note of it can be made in the notes section of the table. Nor when I title is vacated, should it be given a number in the reign category, as it is not actually a title reign.--DonJuan.EXE (talk) 21:30, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

A consensus was already formed earlier about the championship tables; they were added because of the sortability feature. In addition, it helped List of WCW World Tag Team Champions be promoted to Featured list status.--SRX 21:34, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

On a personal note, where are these "consensus" formed. People constantly make reference to them, yet never actually show where they are, which at times can make one feel like they never actually took place. If it was, then why have very few ists been changed.I still argue that the "Event" list is unessicary, as it can simply be noted in the "Notes" section, and would fill up some unnessicary white space in some situations. And I'd like to point out that the List of WWE Champions did not require a sortability feature to achieve Featured List status.--DonJuan.EXE (talk) 21:42, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

The consenses are formed normally on this talk page or on the nomination discussions for Featured and Good status. Being able to sort them allows someone to look at a particular wrestler's title history, to see if the title has never changed hands at a particular PPV or indeed always changes at a particular PPV and I don't really see what the problem with it being sortable is. If you don't want to sort it - don't. The thing about notes sections is they became very sloppy and instead of it being a notes section it became a 'match/opponent/event/consequence' section for every win rather than just noting notable points which made it much more of an eyesore than some white space does. Tony2Times (talk) 22:29, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

In response to List of WWE Champions, it was promoted before the new consensus was formed and no one has taken the liberty to transform the tables.--SRX 22:31, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Over at WP:FLC, they normally call for lists to be sortable during the nomination responses. List of WWE Champions was promoted to Featured List status before the requirements at FL were made much stricter. Nikki♥311 00:21, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

General question

Is there any way to find out how many hits an individual article receives? Tony2Times (talk) 14:13, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Total views? I don't know. I know you can see how many views in a 1 month period. TJ Spyke 15:08, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Yes, there is a way. An example is here. D.M.N. (talk) 15:21, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

That is what I was talking about, that particular link is for views of that page only for the month of November 2008. I think he wants a way to find out how many total views the page has ever gotten. I know other Wikis have it, but I can't find it here at Wikipedia. TJ Spyke 15:27, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

I also question it's accuracy as it says the page Eden Black which I created only a few days ago had a handful of hits back in May. Tony2Times (talk) 16:09, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Might you have recreated a deleted article? Thanks, Genius101^Guestbook 19:59, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

It doesn't seem to be a recreation of a deleted article (the deletion log was empty). Maybe someone was looking for the article in May or clicked a link from another article, which would have brought them to that page. Nikki♥311 22:05, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Dale Hey → Buddy Roberts

Easily better known. RandySavageFTW (talk) 15:54, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Dont know if it has been mentioned already but for moves as obvious as this there is no need to post them here. Follow Be Bold and just move it. There is no consensus needed. JakeDHS07 22:39, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

I can't, it needs an admin move. And people usually find a reason to oppose even if the move is obvious like this one. RandySavageFTW (talk) 22:45, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Set up a move request following the instructions at WP:RM and i'll support it (or put it in the "uncontroversial moves" section and an admin might just move it). TJ Spyke 22:53, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Alternate: You can ask an admin to do it for you, like User:Nikki311, since WP:RM is a long process before they actually move the article.--SRX 22:56, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Watch WWE The Music, Vol. 9

People keep adding unsourced track lists. The closest thing to a "source" is rumor sites that themselves have no reliable source, or claim it's on Allmusic.com when no such thing is to be found there. Maxwell7985 (talk) 04:30, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Kurt Angle

I read on Wrestlezone that the WWE creative are pitching ideas for a possible return to the company. Obviously, I took this with a pinch of salt, but not everyone will, so I'd keep vigilant over the next few days for WWE return rumours on his page.King garthur (talk) 09:46, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Doubtful since multiple times Angle has said he will never work for WWE again and is always bad mouthing Vince. Also Wrestlezone is an unreliable source. If I don't have the page watchlisted I'll watch it.--WillC 10:18, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Actually Will in recent interviews Kurt has done a complete 360 on his talk of WWE. In fact during the last one I read he praised Triple H. Which is rare from any wrestlers let alone Kurt Angle. I could very well see it happening.JakeDHS07 13:13, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Not to mention there have been plenty of wrestlers that badmouthed Vince and/or the WWE itself and later re-signed (most notably Hulk Hogan). TJ Spyke 17:01, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

That's true. Sable sued WWE for sexual harassment and later returned to the company. Nikki♥311 17:04, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, everything is possible but I seriously doubt it since he is supposedly going into MMA in 2009.--WillC 21:48, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

I don't think he's going back, or to MMA, but the rumourshave begun to circulate so somone will put it on his page, like with Christian and Gail Kim.King garthur (talk) 03:00, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Tag teams

Do Randy, Cody and Manu really exist as a stable after appearing once together, not even in a match to beat someonedown, alongside Jericho too? Also shouldn't Ted and Cody still be listed as we haven't seen them formally split up? Interestinlgy they are referred to as Priceless on the Slammy nominations. Tony2Times (talk) 15:15, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Main Event Mafia

Why don't we have a page for the Main Event Mafia? Canamerican (talk) 03:14, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

It hasn't reached the notability at the moment. After the new year it probably will.--WillC 03:16, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

The Main Event Mafia (MEM) has been a big part of TNA storylines since October now. I think it's reached notability by now. Events leading up to its formation started in July 2008, and the group currently holds the TNA World Heavyweight Title and the TNA Legends Title that they introduced to the company. They started with 4 members, and introduced a 5th member, and they're all former World Heavyweight Champions, the only group who can ever claim that in wrestling. Canamerican (talk) 03:24, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

It doesn't matter who is in the group it matters what they have done. They've been around for less than two months which does not surffice notability in my mind. Plus the only reason they are around is for the Vets vs Youngblood storyline which could end at any moment. It is better to wait till further notice. The storyline hasn't even official begun yet. It is more about Angle wanting to fight Jarrett than The Main Event Mafia wanting to start a war. Plus the only belt they really have is the Legends Championship since Sting won the TNA belt before the group was made.--WillC 03:34, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

I disagree with you. I think we should have a vote here. Canamerican (talk) 03:46, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Decisions like these are made per opinions not votes. We need more people to comment.--WillC 03:51, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Doubtless the MEM will be a notable stable but first they need to do something more than appear at one PPV. I agree with Will that after the new year, once they've been at three PPVs, that feels about right and noteable as TNA has the tendancy to shitcan things fast and if this Angle rumour is true (doubtful but never know) then the situation could be very different. Hopefully someone can get a picture of the group together as a fivesome (or sixsome) for when it comes time to make their page. Tony2Times (talk) 04:48, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Yes, it isn't if they are notable it is when they will be. Just like WWE did with Rey Mysterio vs Kane or TNA did with Joe winning the world title. The article is fully finished and sourced in a subpage already by me. I saved the last revision from the other MEM article that I wrote. Like Tony said, an image is needed as well. The last image that was placed in the other is a copywritten image from the tv show which can't be used. We need one of them together from a live event or the logo, which would work if it can be found and used under the correct copyright laws.--WillC 05:09, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

If you go to this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_EeTzKzGmd8 the MEM logo is at 28:45. Could we just screen cap that? The TNA Frontline is also at 28:50, for when we need that as well. Canamerican (talk) 07:31, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

No, we can't use that. We would have to find it on a site that would be reliable and it would have to meet the criteria for Fair use. One from TNA Wrestling.com or from a video would not work because they of are to high in resolution.--WillC 09:24, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

First time I've ever heard YouTube described as too high resolution ;) Tony2Times (talk) 12:15, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

YouTube is actually working on adding HD videos to their site. TJ Spyke 14:49, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

That mainly refers to TNA.com stuff. Stuff from youtube videos aren't allow at all. You can use them as a source as along as they are from the copyright holder. Like TNA's Youtube account.--WillC 14:46, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

I think the Main Event Mafia page should be put up after tonight's PPV. Canamerican (talk) 21:26, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

X Wrestling Federation → Xcitement Wrestling Federation

I don't know if there's really any need for a consensus, but X Wrestling Federation is not the official name. ${\mathfrak {s}}{\mathfrak {a}}{\mathfrak {v}}{\mathfrak {i}}{\mathfrak {o}}{\mathfrak {r}}$ ${\mathfrak {s}}{\mathfrak {e}}{\mathfrak {l}}{\mathfrak {f}}$${\mathfrak {.}}$${\mathfrak {7}}{\mathfrak {7}}{\mathfrak {7}}$ 07:34, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Is that even notable? It lasted from "late 2001 to early 2002". It needs some third party reliable sources to prove notability. Nikki♥311 18:32, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Sources

I believe that Wrestling Information Archive should be moved to unreliable sources in the style guide. I'm not sure but has anyone noticed that they just copy off of us? I've seen around four or five articles on their site that are exact copies of articles on here.--WillC 18:08, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

I thought it already was. :/ I think the only thing people still use it for is PWI rankings and awards because it is "better than nothing". Nikki♥311 18:30, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

I haven't seen them just copy from Wikipedia. Besides, they are used for some good things (like Nikki said). Besides, everything posted on Wikipedia is free for other sites to use (at least the text, pictures vary). TJ Spyke 21:14, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Go to the site and look up TNA. It is a fully copied from Total Nonstop Action Wrestling. All their TNA ppvs are copies from the old way they all use to look.--WillC 21:20, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Well ethically there's little wrong with them copying from WIkipedia as it is free for other sites to use. It does somewhat remove the purpose of us citing them as a reliable source if their source was. Tony2Times (talk) 00:40, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

The Dan Kroffat and Philip Lafond articles

The article that was at Dan Kroffat has been moved to "Cowboy" Dan Kroffat with the Dan Kroffat article becoming a disambiguation page. The main problem is that its to disambiguate from Philip Lafond -- who also used the name Dan Kroffat. This makes no sense. Why have a disambiguation page to disambiguate between two articles with completely different names? There's a hatnote at the top of what is now "Cowboy" Dan Kroffat. That should be enough, shouldn't it?.

Is there any way I can get this changed back? Stephen Day (talk) 18:58, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Request a move. There is no need for a disambiguation page for only 2 articles. That's what hatlinks are for (those are the things at the top of some articles that say "This article is about .... ". TJ Spyke 21:16, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

OK, I started the discussion Here. Stephen Day (talk) 03:56, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Title Defenses

To make more informative articles on Wrestling Titles, how about we include Title Defenses? So for say the TNA World Heavyweight Title, we include every successful title defense for Kurt Angle, Sting, Samoa Joe, etc. We can do this for every other title too, with of course sources indicating that match certainly took place. I could definitely work on this project. We could include this on collapse tables for each champion listed. Canamerican (talk) 06:35, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Except most promotions don't keep track of every single title defense. Which means if you did want to have a source for every single title defense, you would have to provide a source for every show the title was defended on. And what about title defenses in outside promotions? The TNA X Division Championship has been defended in Ring of Honor, Pro Wrestling Guerrilla, and who knows how many other promotions, so how would you ever know if you have an accurate count or not of successful title defenses? I say if the promotion keeps track of it (like ROH, FIP & JAPW), then fine include it, but if not don't. Nenog (talk) 07:25, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

WrestleView.com has an archive of every single TNA show since their inception on June 19, 2002. So that would work there. Canamerican (talk) 08:16, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

No, they don't. They have Impact history. No weekly ppvs. pro wrestling history and PWtorch have the weekly ppv histories. Plus the weekly ppvs can't source the title being defended in other promotions.--WillC 08:21, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Not to mention houseshows, which the farther back in time you go the harder it is to find reports. Plus, wrestling titles are defended on a regular basis (unlike boxing and MMA, where it's not uncommon to defend a title 2 times in an entire YEAR. During one of Lennox Lewis's title reigns, he had the WBC title for 50 months but only defended it 10 times). TJ Spyke 17:09, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

I have considered the same thing myself, but unlike MMA and Boxing, the titles are defended nearly everywhere(house shows/special events) so there wouldn't be enough WP:RS to back them up. --Numyht (talk) 19:41, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Agree with TJ and Numhyt. Simply not a feasible idea. ♥Nici♥Vampire♥Heart♥ 21:01, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Umm Will, wouldn't you say these are the Weekly PPV results at WrestleView.com? http://www.wrestleview.com/results/nwatna/nwatna.shtml Thought eh. Canamerican (talk) 21:14, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

As TJ pointed out though, still no details of house shows. Tony2Times (talk) 23:07, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Interesting, I did not even know they were there. Though I don't use wrestleview that much, good to have weekly results for future reference.--WillC 23:08, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, WWE and TNA doesn't put results up for house shows, only the televised and PPVS. But to be fair to Canamerican, a promotion like SHIMMER for example would fit this criteia as they aren't defending all over the place(Only in ROH, FIP) and not every 1 to 2 days. Still, we would need sources. --Numyht (talk) 09:06, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

I don't think people are taking into account how long the article are going to get if titles defenses are added to them. I can't comment on the SHIMMER ones for example, but I do know that the WWE ones are defended at practically every house show. Then tv tapings and pay-per-views? I'm sorry, but no way in hell that'd work. I stand by my earlier comment that this ides simply is not feasible. ♥Nici♥Vampire♥Heart♥ 09:22, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Fair enough Nici --Numyht (talk) 10:47, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

While the SHIMMER Championship defenses can be easily sourced, the tag titles are a little more tricky since they're being defended on random indy shows. While the promoter, Dave Prazak, can provide a list of defenses, they're going to occur more frequenty. Mshake3 (talk) 18:15, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

There are also many titles (like the NWA World Heavyweight Championship), where there are several long periods of time where the lineage isn't known. How are we going to list defenses when the champion isn't even known? Nikki♥311 18:21, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Eric Young is a former X-Division Champion

Eric Young did in fact win and become the TNA X-Division Champion at Final Resolution. He was then stripped of the title afterwards. He is still credited as being X-Division Champion though. Canamerican (talk) 04:48, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Lets wait and see what happens. The title is vacant right now.--WillC 04:52, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

TNA's site does say he won the title (on the FR results page) and that afterwards Cornette declared the title vacant. TJ Spyke 05:02, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

So that makes Eric Young a former X-Division Champion then. Canamerican (talk) 05:55, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Eh, it sounds exactly like what happened a few weeks ago, in that the previous result was anulled. Mshake3 (talk) 18:53, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Poster

Okay, this has annoyed me for a while now. Genesis (2006) has no poster. The only TNA ppv that does not have a poster. I've not found it anywhere. I have on the other hand found the DVD cover at multiple websites. Is it okay to use that as the poster?--WillC 04:58, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

For now it's no problem, I hope someone can find the poster though. This is a problem with ECW PPVs too, I have uploaded several VHS covers since posters are very difficult to find for them. TJ Spyke 05:02, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

It will later since it is a future project of mine.--WillC 05:23, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Try search engines other than Google. http://www.gerweck.net/genesis06.jpg Nenog (talk) 05:37, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

I guess that could be used. Thanks. I'll get it cleared by everyone before uploading though.--WillC 05:40, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Reign length articles

Is there anyway that we can improve and source these articles to meet FL standards. Maybe a new layout to make it easier to source without having the exact number of days sourced. Maybe adding to the tables date won, date lost, and give a math problem to make it not fall under original research to show how many days. I'm just brain storming here. I see so many reign articles that it starts to seem useless if they aren't going to ever be improved. Something like this maybe.

Wrestler	Date Won	Date Lost	Days Held
Samoa Joe	April 13, 2008 (Day 104 in 2008)	October 12, 2008 (Day 286 in 2008)	182 (286 - 104)

It seems stupid but I'm just trying to think of something that might work.--WillC 10:51, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

I would rather see them merged, I doubt they could reach FL status because it's basically content forking. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 12:01, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Listing the days of the year (Day 104 in 2008) doesn't seem to add anything IMO. TJ Spyke 16:15, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

X Division Stuff

Better keep a lookout on TNA X Division Championship and all it's related pages. --Numyht (talk) 13:04, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

User:NickLenz19

Consensus was made here about little notes to championships and accomplishments sections. He continues to do it, gets warned 3 times, and then keeps on doin' it. I reported at WP:AIAV and it got reverted because it wasn't obvious vandalism. They are no specific categories for ignoring consensus. What to do? RandySavageFTW (talk) 15:50, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Maybe WP:RFC or WP:DR if it's gotten out of hand?  Hazardous Matt  16:14, 8 December 2008 (UTC)