User talk:WWEJobber

Fast Five

Since you've registered an account, there is no reason to edit anonymously which exposes your IP address. Unless you forgot to log in. Also on Fast Five, please do not add cast members that have not been reported by reliable sources (Internet Movie Database does not count has a reliable source per Wikipedia guidelines). Thank you. —Mike Allen 02:42, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

Recent addtions you made

I was wondering why you added WWE referees, WWE.com personnel and En Espanol commentators to the WWE Roster template? I think the info is unneeded. And why did you remodeled the WWE Roster page?--Mikeymike2001 (talk) 21:14, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

You're welcome. But I think you made alittle mess to the WWE Roster page. There's now two Other personnel sections, Jack Korpela is a SmackDown commentator on Superstars(making him apart of the SmackDown roster), and I don't think WWE.com personnel deserves their own section, yet.--Mikeymike2001 (talk) 21:30, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

Response

I think Riley's still apart of the Raw roster, like STAT said. He is storyline fired. I'm sorry, that's what I think mostly. I think if you leave Riley where he is as a member of the Raw roster, STAT would leave you alone. Once again, I'm sorry.--Mikeymike2001 (talk) 22:35, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

AJ's correct real name is April Jeanette! Stop changing it into AJ Mendez! Her ring name was once April MendeS! http://www.genickbruch.com/index.php?befehl=bios&wrestler=13075 (Bürgerlicher name means real name)! Genickbruch always has the right names and information! I have a source. Where's your source? --Hixteilchen (talk) 06:46, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, I admit that I was wrong. Thank you for that information. I have changed it on AJ Lee. --Hixteilchen (talk) 17:09, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

I have startet a discussion about her real name. Please visit Talk:AJ Lee. Thank you. --Hixteilchen (talk) 18:33, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Problem about Queen of FCW

I think your view of the Queen of FCW title is very different from what most on here see it. The Queen of FCW is a title like the FCW Divas Championship and can be defended like the title. But in your point of view, you see it as the Florida 15. I'm just trying to solve this confusion about this Queen title. I'm not mad, just getting very confused. Plus, it looks like you're in an edit war with Wrestling 0101. What is going on between you two? If you don't stop the edit war you're in, you'll be banned. Trust me, I was in an edit war not to long ago and was banned for a few days.--Mikeymike2001 (talk) 22:41, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

Wrestling 0101 responded to my question about the Queen of Florida situation by stating: "If he watched the show then he would know it is always been called the Queen of FCW, all that takes it simple hearing and listening. The difference between the Florida 15 and Queen Of FCW is that FCW lists the Queen of FCW as a title on their site and has been defended as a title in FCW for years now. They even have had unification matches for the Queen of FCW and Divas title, but ended in a no contest. If it was an accomplishment then it wouldnt be able to be unified, but since they are both titles, they can be unified. That is my side of this." If you like to respond, please talk to him on his talk page--Mikeymike2001 (talk) 19:43, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

WWE personell

I find it extremely difficult to believe that Vince McMahon, as Chairman and CEO of World Wrestling Entertainment, would not be listed under Executive Officials. Could you explain your removal of his name from that list?--Tærkast (Communicate) 09:23, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Fair enough. He doesn't seem to appear on TV as much as he used to, though. --Tærkast (Communicate) 15:41, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Sorry again

I'm sorry for reverting you again.--Mikeymike2001 (talk) 18:49, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

WWE personnel

Alex Riley may not be KayFabe "signed" to Raw but he wrestles soly on Raw live events with most to all of his matches based around "getting a contract" so his not "unassigned" he's assigned to RAW. STATic message me! 03:15, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Well he just returned tonight like I have said he would so you no longer have an argument for change. STATic message me! 03:36, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Please stop, you'll be 3RR banned.--Mikeymike2001 (talk) 03:43, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Template Problems

All I was doing was improving the template to match the WWE Template. Why can't I have it the way it's suppose to look?--Mikeymike2001 (talk) 20:17, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

Question about the "active" legends

Those legends that Vj put up are active legends working with the company right now. The Rock is going to promote his match with John Cena all year until WrestleMania XXVIII. Jim Ross is in the middle of the current Jerry Lawler/Michael Cole feud and Diesel/Nash is planning to make appearances soon. Why do you want to remove the legends list when they are there now?--Mikeymike2001 (talk) 21:46, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

What about "I.R.S. Man" Mike Rotunda, Dusty Rhodes, Ricky "The Dragon" Steamboat and Arn Anderson? They maybe backstage personnel, but they make appearances on TV. Do you think they belong in the "active" legends list?--Mikeymike2001 (talk) 22:03, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

Vince McMahon

You don't have to have seperate listings for Vince McMahon. He primarily now just functions in his corporate role. His twice a year appearances on TV don't justify listing him as part of the main roster.

Vince only needs to be listed in Executive Officers, as he is no longer a prominent on-air figure. The last time "Mr. McMahon" was featured as part of his own angle was vs Bret Hart at WM XXVI. Since then, his on air appearences have been few and far between.

Vjmlhds 13:52, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

You're wrong. WM26 was the last time that we saw Mr. McMahon in-ring competition. He appeared in character a lot of times after it: when he made Bret Hart Raw GM, when he fired Bret Hart, when he made Hornswaggle the anonymous GM, when he made The Rock WM27 host, when he announced the new season of Tough Enough, when he suspended CM Punk, when he tried to convince CM Punk to sign another contract, when he and Laurinaitis interfered on Cena/Punk match on MITB, when Triple H reliaved him from his duties, when he himself relieved Triple H from his duties, when he named Laurinaitis the new Raw GM, when he evaluated Laurinaitis job, when he fired Laurinaitis on NWO, when he named AJ Lee the new Raw GM and when he named Booker T Smackdown GM.WWEJobber (talk) 14:13, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

Will you stop with the double listing of Vince and HHH already. It is unecessary and redundant. Vince doesn't appear enough on TV to justify going on the roster, and HHH is too involved in storylines to take him off of it. Everybody gets one listing, and one listing only. I'm having other people sending me messages complaining about you, so stop it, please. Vjmlhds 23:40, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

There is no double-listing about Vince if you pay attention.WWEJobber (talk) 23:50, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks

I've never had someone revert my edits, then revert their reversion before I got to it. That was cool of you. I take it we now agree on why "wrestler" is better than "superstar"? Or am I missing something? InedibleHulk (talk) 05:16, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

Sole Owners

Please stop saying the McMahons are the "sole owners" of WWE.

To make a comparison, TNA is a privately owned company. So Dixie Carter's parents would indeed be the sole owners because no one else has any stake in the company (the Jarretts sold it to them 100% lock, stock and barrel).

WWE on the other hand is a publically traded company on the New York Stock Exchange, and has numerous shareholders owning varying amounts of stock. Don't get me wrong, the McMahons hold the vast majority of stock in the company, and they are the bosses, but due to the fact that there are other shareholders out there, it is inaccurate to refer them as the "sole owners".

Vjmlhds 20:26, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

Robbie Brookside is not working with WWE

He only appeared for one week for talent scouting. He's not an official WWE employee, so he has to be removed. As for your other edits, why are you removing updated information? Everything was correct. Keith Okamoto (talk) 18:31, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Ricardo/El Local

It isn't necessary to add all the excess information about when and where Ricardo wrestles as El Local. All that matters is that he does in fact don the mask and works as said luchadore.

You're starting a slippery slope here because then other people may add qualifiers to other people, like say for instance Brock Lesnar, who is only contracted for X amount of dates with WWE. Or Undertaker who only shows up at Rumble-Mania time.

We don't need to know certain guys only wrestle in months with an "r" or anything like that.

Does a guy wrestle for WWE?...if yes, then he goes on the list. Clean and simple.

Vjmlhds 03:26, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

All of the extra curricular stuff can go into Ricardo's own article. I'm not saying all that info about the El Local character isn't true, it's just that trying to cram all of it in to the notes section just gums things up a bit and makes the article look sloppy. There's a time and a place, and the small little notes section isn't it. Vjmlhds 03:42, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Well, I put it up for discussion on the WWE roster talk page. I'll leave it as is for now, and if consensus says to keep it that way, I'll live with it. It isn't worth edit warring over. We both have gone to the wiki principal's office and have been blocked, and this ain't worth fighting over, so I'll let the majority rule on the talk page, and whatever happens, happens. Vjmlhds 04:00, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

(Shrug)...It isn't worth bickering over. The added info about El Local doesn't hurt the article that much. It can stay with my blessing (for what it's worth). Vjmlhds 04:11, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Brand Extension/House Shows.

For all intents and purposes, there is no more brand extension, and there hasn't been one for over a year.

Even for house shows, while they may be designated "Raw" or "SD", it's still a mix-and-match of talent.

A handful of SD guys will be on the Raw tour, and vice versa. Then on the next loop, things get shaken and stirred again.

In all reality, what WWE has these days is "Traveling Party 1" and "Traveling Party 2", "Raw" and "SD" are really just fancy names for them.

Everything in WWE today from TV to PPV to house shows are mix-and-match. They don't even pretend that Raw and SD are seperate entities/"brands" any more--they are merely weekly shows...just like Main Event and Saturday Morning Slam.

Vjmlhds 19:16, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

In correct, sir...Go to Wrestlezone or 411 Mania, and you'll see that virtually all house show cards have some sort of mixing and matching. There is no functional brand extension anymore...any wrestler can be on any show at anytime with no restrictions. All cards and programming are open season in WWE. Vjmlhds 19:30, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

You're picking nits Jobber. It was long ago agreed to that we would list all WWE talent under one section due to the Supershow format because everybody was appearing on every show, this includes house shows. You're starting to be disruptive, and if you don't stop, I'm gonna ask to have you blocked. Vjmlhds 19:41, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

You know you're violating WP:3RR with these constant edits, right? And yes you are being disruptive. WWE mixes and matches talent everywhere...TV, house shows, PPV, you name it. They don't restrict anything. THERE IS NO MORE BRAND EXTENSION! The Supershow format did away with it. Anybody can be on any show at any time. Why is that so hard to understand? Vjmlhds 20:13, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Hi WWEJobber, I'm Qwyrxian, an administrator on Wikipedia. Vjmlhds asked me to take a look at your recent editing on List of WWE personnel. Vjmlhds is incorrect that your edits violate WP:3RR--in fact, as far as I can see, you've never had more than 2 reverts in 24 hours (and Vjmlhds has more reverts than you do in the same time periods). Nonetheless, I will say that your overall approach to editing is a bit concerning. On a page like that one (or, in fact, many wrestling pages), which can be contentious, if you make a change, and someone else disagrees, the very next thing you need to do is go to the talk page and explain why you support the change. You should not just try to make your change again. If you can't get consensus on the article's talk page for the change, either let it go, or follow dispute resolution. The way I think of this is that Wikipedia is essentially a conservative project, in that we stay with the status quo (old version of an article), and that its up to the person who wants to make the change to justify it if others disagree. Trying to force your edits in, no matter how many edits you make, can be considered edit warring, which can result in a block; conversation on the article talk page is always better. Qwyrxian (talk) 22:30, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Hello WWEJobber, regarding the brand extension, I was the one who originally proposed on WT:PW to cease explictly mentioning the brand split on the WWE Personnel template, simply because: while WWE still assigns wrestlers to a certain brand, the brand is not notable any more because the wrestlers are not confined to a brand's show any more, as far as television shows are concerned, and TV/PPV/Net shows are the key shows (while house shows certainly are not). If you disagree with me, that's fine, just hop over to WT:PW and start a new topic to establish a new consensus. Starship.paint (talk) 13:21, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Problem with Bronson/J Bronson

Ok. There's a problem with one of the NXT wrestlers. J Bronson is the name on the NXT Wrestling site while Bronson's the name on WWE.com's NXT site. Which is which because it's confusing. I believe it's Bronson because he was on an episode of WWE NXT as Bronson. Keith Okamoto (talk) 04:52, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Alright, I've just checked the WWE.com NXT page and they did fix J Bronson's name and it added a "." next to J, but I saw that Erick Rowan's name is missing the "k" in Erick. Is that a problem too or is that another spelling error? Keith Okamoto (talk) 05:04, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Hey!

I'm sorry, but it has to be done. WWE execs have been talking about bringing back NXT to american television screens since NXT changed their format. Tonight started what I believe is that. They first start an invasion angle of NXT superstars, with Seth Rollins, Dean Ambrose and Roman Reigns demanding that WWE should expose more of the NXT roster after being relegated to international/online broadcasting. If this is correct, then what I've done on List of WWE personnel should remain. Keith Okamoto (talk) 04:11, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

What I'm saying that tonight won't be the last we see those three. That is why I've moved them to the main roster. What we are seeing is a invasion angle of mostly top NXT stars appearing on Raw and SmackDown in the coming weeks or months, as not every NXT superstar is going to even show up. I believe that NXT superstar TAC was giving out hints of this storyline during his twitter rant yesterday. Keith Okamoto (talk) 04:39, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Those are just my opinions, everyone's entitled to some. Listen, all I'm saying is yes, they are developmental superstars, but two out of the three(Dean and Seth) were going to debut for the main roster anyway. What I'm doing is trying to keep the WWE personnel page updated with the WWE. Keith Okamoto (talk) 04:51, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

I didn't see it until now. When Sakamoto debuted with Tensai, he was moved to the main roster after his segment was done. Guess I'll wait until those three appear more often. Keith Okamoto (talk) 05:06, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Yes, Brett Dibiase in 2009 was a false start...but that doesn't canel out the numerous guys who stick around once they get called up from FCW/NXT. All of the Nexus guys (Barrett/Ryback/Bryan/Otunga etc., Sandow, Clay, Cesaro...they all got automatically moved to the main roster once they appeared. So I'm just playing the odds here. Dibiase is more of the exception than the rule. Vjmlhds 05:47, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Can we agree on this...I'll leave it alone until after Raw tomorrow night. If during Raw it becomes obvious that these guys are gonna be around for the long haul (like for instance in a Nexus style group), than they should be bumped up. While I do believe you're splitting hairs and picking nits here, I'll be willing to stand down (for now) to allow some time to let it play out. But by having these guys participate in a main event match on a major PPV, it should be apperent that WWE thinks these guys are ready for the big leauges and are allowing them to be part of the main roster. Vjmlhds 06:00, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

You don't dictate the terms or make the rules. Let's go to the WWE roster talk page and reach a consensus, and majority rules. Vjmlhds 06:05, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

WWE.com isn't the end-all, be-all. Wikipedia isn't a kayfabe site, it is a real world site. Again...I'm not changing anything (for now), and will wait for consensus before any further moves. Vjmlhds 06:11, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

There is at least three people supporting the change and none supporting your side WWEJobber so do not continue reverting the pages if you don't have consensus. STATic message me! 09:10, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Johnny Curtis/Fandango

I'm really sorry. In those new promos, you can clearly see Johnny as Fandango. Yes, all we know about the Fandango character is that he loves to dance, but still it's Johnny Curtis with a new gimmick. How about we agree that there should be a "/Fandango" to Johnny's name just like there's a "/El Local" to Ricardo's name? Keith Okamoto (talk) 02:42, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Well, this aired during Raw last night, it appears that they haven't given up on Fandango. Keith Okamoto (talk) 06:53, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Enough, already.

Enough, Jobber.

Please stop labeling the "Shield" boys as developmental...when you're on the main roster, and main eventing a PPV, you're not developmental anymore. And the note at the top of the article covers guys from the main roster also appearing on NXT.

And Johnny Curtis is now Fandango...he's being promoted on TV as Fandango, and wrestling on house shows as Fandango...what more do you need? A notary public?!?!

You're being extremely disruptive with your unecessary and convoluted edits, and I'm begging you to please stop, or else I'll have to ask to get you blocked.

Vjmlhds 14:25, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

Please stop pushing it, Jobber.

All the other editors on the WWE roster page are fine with listing Curtis as Fandango, and not listing the Shield guys as developmental.

Why do you have to be so difficult?

First the brand extension stuff, then Vince, and now this.

This "my way or the highway" attitude needs to stop, or I will request that you get blocked.

Vjmlhds 19:22, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

NXT is taped way in advance, filming 4-5 weeks worth of shows in one shot.

That match you're referring to may be as much as 6 weeks old. Meanwhile WWE has been building the "Fandango" character up in all that time.

You need to back off. You're fighting a 1-man battle which other editors besides me have told you to stop. Vjmlhds 19:47, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

Curtis has wrestled as Fandango in dark matches and house shows...are you saying those don't count? If you are then that arguement doesn't hold water, and neither does your developmental arguement.

If you're on the main roster and involved on major storylines, then that means WWE thinks you're ready for the big time. NXT is the developmental/training league, where you are prepped for the main roster. Just like any other walk of life, once you complete your training, you're now a regular part of the roster.

Are cops who graduate from the police acadamy still cadets once they're part of the police force?

No.

Same idea applies here.

The Shield boys have graduated from the NXT acadamy...they're not cadets anymore.

Vjmlhds 19:44, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

WP:Spoiler

This says basically that Wikipedia allows spoilers.

Vjmlhds 19:45, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

Nothing in WP:Spoiler even intimates that spoilers (if you want to even call it that in this case) can't be used in any circumstances.

WP:Spoiler also points out that editors who take it upon themselves to be "spoiler police" are considered to be edit warring...and we know how Wiki top men feel about that.

And the roster page from 2 years ago that you showed me is irrelevant in this case. Because since then, most editors have found it easier to just indicate at the top of the page that sometimes guys on the main roster also work down in the minors, rather than pointing it out for each and every guy for who it applies.

So everything you've tried to point out falls flat. WP:Spoiler says all spoilers are okey-dokey, and in 2 1/2 years since the Nexus days, it's been found easier to have one all encompassing note at the top of the page rather than point out individually guys who work both the main roster and also down in FCW/NXT.

Vjmlhds 20:07, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

The Shield boys are now all listed on the WWE.com roster. There is no logical reason to call them developmental anymore. There comes a point when guys stop being developmental and start being official main roster members. They're on the WWE.com roster, they're getting a major push, and they're in a high profile PPV match, if that's not a tell tale signs that Ambrose, Rollins, and Reigns are now "made men", then I don't know what is. I really think you're grasping at straws here, and it would be best to stop while you're ahead.

Vjmlhds 23:22, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

You're persistent...I'll give you that. But you're also disruptive. I don't want to be that guy, but if you label the Shield guys as "developmental" or remove the Fandango listing one more time, I will put in a block request. Please stop.

Vjmlhds 14:57, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

International Airstrike

I've already clearly stated in the edit summary (while providing a source http://www.webcitation.org/6BUsNqAtO) that International Airstrike is an unofficial name. Where's your source that says it's official? Also note that the source you provide should be a primary (WWE.com) source, as of course WWE.com is going to be more accurate on any secondary source on this issue. Starship.paint (talk) 00:19, 11 December 2012 (UTC)

You've already brought up the "official twitter" before without actually providing a link. So where is this official twitter? Starship.paint (talk) 09:17, 11 December 2012 (UTC)

List of WWE personnel

Please join the discussion on the article's talk page when you have a chance. Qwyrxian (talk) 03:53, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Steve Keirn with a fan.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Steve Keirn with a fan.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. NiciVampireHeart 15:31, 16 December 2012 (UTC)