Talk:Roman Reigns

Orphaned references in Joe Anoaʻi

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 Joe Anoaʻi'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 "observer1":

• From CM Punk: Martin, Todd (2008-08-12). "Todd Martin's Raw Report for August 25th". Wrestling Observer Newsletter. Retrieved 2008-09-07.
• From The Great Khali: Grimaldi, Michael C. (2008-09-05). "Early Smackdown TV report for September 5". Wrestling Observer Newsletter. Retrieved 2008-09-09.
• From Kofi Kingston: Martin, Todd (2008-09-01). "Todd Martin's Labor Day Raw Report". Wrestling Observer Newsletter. Retrieved 2008-09-09.
• From Triple H: Grimaldi, Michael C. (2008-08-26). "Early Smackdown TV report for August 29". Wrestling Observer Newsletter. Retrieved 2008-09-08.
• From John Morrison (wrestler): DiLiegro, Phil (2008-08-26). "Phil DiLiegro's ECW TV report for August 26". Wrestling Observer/Figure Four Online. Retrieved 2008-09-08.
• From Evan Bourne: DiLiegro, Phil (2008-09-02). "Phil DiLiegro's ECW TV report for September 2". Wrestling Observer/Figure Four Online. Retrieved 2008-09-09.

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⚡ 01:31, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

Requested move

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. Tyrol5 [Talk] 02:34, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

---

Joe Anoa'i → Roman Reigns – Despite his football career, I think his WWE career is far more popular, so the common name to go by should be "Roman Reigns", the character that debuted on WWE's pay-per-view and also participates on internationally streamed television programmes Raw, SmackDown and NXT. Google News shows "Roman Reigns" -> 411 results, "Leakee" -> 3 results, "Joe Anoa'i" -> 1 result, "Leati Joseph Anoa'i" (real name)-> 1 result. Starship.paint (talk) 08:31, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

• Support - As much as I wanted to be Leakee first, I'll go for Reigns since it's used more. Keith Okamoto (talk) 09:02, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
• Support WWE career is more high-profile and current than the CFL one, so that's the common name. Beside the point, cool to learn this is Sika's kid. Looking back, I see it. InedibleHulk (talk) 23:38, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

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.

Hii Abhishekyadav892987 (talk) 07:25, 10 September 2016 (UTC)

Personal Life

Please STOP making edits about his fiancee.who is editing .

There is no interview to confirm that his engagement was called off, it has been fact checked.  Further attempts should be referenced by a verifiable source, thanks.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.77.146.240 (talk) 00:45, 18 May 2013 (UTC) 

Once again, just fixed this. Roman Reigns is engaged to the mother of his child. Please STOP with the edits unless you can tag and source it with a working link to said video. — Preceding unsigned comment added by FactChecker2172013 (talk • contribs) 10:50, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

I've semiprotected the article for a week. This means that you won't be able to edit it either, FactChecker, until you become autoconfirmed, but if you or anyone else has verifiable content they'd like added, they can make a request here. Qwyrxian (talk) 11:43, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

He is married to the most beautiful woman in the whole world (in his eyes),mother of his baby girl Galina Dange 34-4 (talk) 12:34, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

Roman Reigns wife is pregnant with twins says Rusev. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:304:B1B0:5D00:9867:C837:ABB:9BF0 (talk) 03:08, 16 February 2017 (UTC) He has two sons now they are twins. and now 7 months. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:304:B1B0:5D00:C18E:1F90:2FE8:97BB (talk) 16:58, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

Signature move name?

I could be wrong about this, but I believe that the "Running dropkick from the floor to the head of an opponent draped over the second rope" is being called the Roman Candle. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Biff Andreas (talk • contribs) 23:49, 1 November 2014 (UTC)

 Not done Biff Andreas no, it isn't. Ikhtiar H (talk) 10:14, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

Superman Punch — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.162.173.118 (talk) 14:24, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

Pumphandle suplex.

Superman punch Redbone703 (talk) 03:45, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

In wrestling - finisher

Should the three-man assisted powerbomb be added to his list of finishers? It was the iconic finishing move of the Shield, and he did the heavy lifting back then. Deltopia (talk) 01:30, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

 Not done Deltopia tag team moves are only placed on their pages. You can find it in Roman Reigns' former team page The Shield. Ikhtiar H (talk) 10:18, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

• It was Ambrose and Rollins did the lifting. Reigns just did the holding and throwing. starship.paint ~ ¡Olé! 14:37, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

In wrestling

Reigns has been using Corner and Jumping clothesline which creates a variation of Clothesline and I think 'Moment of Silence' should be removed because he doesn't use this finisher and he only uses Spear. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yveshe (talk • contribs) 06:48, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

• @Yveshe: - Moment of Silence was his NXT finisher. We do not censor it even if it is now only a signature on the WWE main roster. Also, the rest of his clotheslines need four reliable sources saying he did the move, one one explicit reliable source saying that it is a signature. starship.paint ~ ¡Olé! 07:53, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

Makes sense but he has been using Corner and Jumping clotheslines multiple times in his matches and they're are signature moves which creates a variation of Clotheslines because he has Leaping, Corner and Jumping. If you want a source I can just tell you that I watched his matches on YouTube and he has been using those two signatures multiple times since he returned from injury and even before he was inuried he used those two moves a lot. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yveshe (talk • contribs)

• @Yveshe: - Leaping and Jumping are the same thing! Don't confuse them with (top rope/diving/flying) which are all the same too. We can't use your original research from YouTube. You need to go to WP:PW/RS, click on that Click here, and search for "corner clothesline". Come back the links of four different instances he used that move, and I'll add it in for you. starship.paint ~ ¡Olé! 01:57, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

1. http://www.wrestleview.com/wwe-wrestling-results/wwe-smackdown-results/52364-wwe-smackdown-results-1-2-15-reigns-vs-rusev - Go down below and you'll see "Roman Reigns vs. Rusev w/ Lana" and after the first commercial break, read the 2nd paragraph and you'll see "Reigns quickly clotheslines him in the corner"=Corner clothesline.

2. http://www.wrestleview.com/wwe-wrestling-results/wwe-raw-results/52972-wwe-raw-results-2-9-15-live-results-from-columbus - The first match on this date on Raw was "Roman Reigns and Daniel Bryan vs. Big Show and Kane", on the 11th line after the dot you'll see (and continuing read to 12th line) "Reigns clotheslines him in the corner"=Corner clothesline.

3. http://www.wrestleview.com/wwe-wrestling-results/wwe-raw-results/50648-wwe-raw-results-9-8-14-live-results-from-baltimore - Go down below to the last match at the last "-Commercial Break-" and at 2nd paragraph, end of the 2nd line, you'll read "Reigns clotheslines him in the corner".=Corner clothesline.

I found at least three links and I hope it's proven enough so you could kindly add 'Corner clothesline' and since you said that Leaping is the same as Jumping so I guess it's irrelevant. I have another urgent request about Batista's signature moves that I'd also like you to check out because there's a mistake on one of the moves, a missing move from the 'Powerslam' variations and another missing signature move. And since I posted this request about a month ago about Batista's moves and I haven't got any answer, I think you're the only available person to check it out @starship.paint — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yveshe (talk • contribs) 19:31, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

• @Yveshe: - 3 ain't enough, I need 4. I'll help you for any wrestler's page, as long as you provide 4 reliable sources. starship.paint ~ ¡Olé! 01:15, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

Okay so I'll provide you the last link, including twelve other links in Batista's moveset that are missed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yveshe (talk • contribs)

• @Yveshe: - yes, please do so. Four sources each for each move. Also, ping me to notify me. See what I did with your name? Type {{ping|Starship.paint}} in your next message. Please also sign your edits. At the end of your post, write "~~~~" starship.paint ~ ¡Olé! 13:05, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

@Starship.paint: I've only created an account a month ago so I'll see if I can learn what you've said and provide you the other links from Batista's moveset. "Yveshe (talk) 16:53, 16 February 2015 (UTC)" starship.paint ~ ¡Olé! 18:52, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

@Starship.paint: 4. http://www.wrestleview.com/wwe-wrestling-results/wwe-smackdown-results/50827-wwe-smackdown-results-9-19-14-reigns-vs-rusev - Go down below to the last match and after the second "-Commercial Break-", read the second last line and you'll see "Reigns clotheslines him in the corner". "Yveshe (talk) 17:03, 16 February 2015 (UTC)" starship.paint ~ ¡Olé! 19:02, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

@Starship.paint: Here's the 4th link to provide with the move and about Batista, can I post all the twelve links (three moves) in Batista's talk page and not in here so it'll be more relevant to the page, not kind of annoying and more easier? I'll even start working on the links right now at his talk page. "Yveshe (talk) 17:06, 16 February 2015 (UTC)" starship.paint ~ ¡Olé! 19:06, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

@Starship.paint: I've provided twelve links including two videos about the three moves and one of them to just rename it. Here's the link and you'll see my post about Batista: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Dave_Bautista#Semi-protected_edit_request_on_January_25_2015_.28Updated_date.29_February_16_2015.2A_.27In_wrestling.27 "Yveshe (talk) 18:07, 16 February 2015 (UTC)" starship.paint ~ ¡Olé! 20:07, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

• Added. starship.paint ~ ¡Olé! 11:35, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

@Starship.paint: If you've watched Fastlane three days ago, you've seen how awesome Roman was in his match and the moves he used. I also remember few days ago (probably a month ago) That the "Tilt a Whirl slam" and the "Fireman's carry flapjack" were added but removed and from the counts I counted Roman's moveset in his matches since he returned from injury, he used at least four or five times the "Tilt a Whirl slam" and I'd like if you can add it back to his Signature moves please? "Yveshe (talk) 22:59, 24 February 2015 (UTC)"

• @Yveshe: - rules are the same - need four reliable sources. Good that you've got your signature right. starship.paint ~ ¡Olé! 23:38, 24 February 2015 (UTC

@Starship.paint: (Thanks for checking my signature though, hope I'm doing great) Okay I'll provide the four links for the move, I'll also provide another eight links for two moves that I'd like you to add in Goldberg's 'Multiple powerslam variations' which you'll see at the bottom of the page at his talk page and I also asked you about Batista's Clotheslining an opponent in mid-air if you think it's a move or not. "Yveshe (talk) 13:05, 25 February 2015 (UTC)"

1. http://slam.canoe.ca/Slam/Wrestling/2014/12/26/22150691.html - Scroll down to the last match after the 2nd "(Commercials)" and at the 2nd paragraph, read the 2nd line and you'll see "tilt-a-whirl slam".

2. http://slam.canoe.ca/Slam/Wrestling/2014/12/29/22155191.html?cid=rsssportswrestling - Scroll down to the 6th match "Roman Reigns vs. Seth Rollins", read the 8th line after the dot and you'll see "tilt-a-whirl slam".

3. http://slam.canoe.ca/Slam/Wrestling/2015/02/23/22252066.html - Scroll down to the last match and after the 2nd "(Commercials)", read the 6th line and you'll see "tilt-a-whirl slam".

4. (Whether you've watch Fastlane or not, Roman has used Tilt-a-whirl slam but if it's not reliable enough, I'm still gonna put the link though) http://www.wrestleview.com/wwe-fastlane-results/53162-wwe-fastlane-ppv-results-2-22-15-live-results-in-memphis - Scroll down to the last match, read the 5th line and you'll see "tilt-a-whirl slam".

• @Yveshe: - added. you don't need to tell me which match or which paragraph. Just quote like "tilt-a-whirl slam on Bryan" and I'll be able to find it. starship.paint ~ ¡Olé! 02:57, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

@Starship.paint: Thanks again, just hoping you'd understand. Did you check Goldberg's talk page that I requested two moves to be added and Batista's talk page about Clotheslining from mid-air? "Yveshe (talk) 19:42, 26 February 2015 (UTC)"

I love roman reigns he is so hot and I got all wwe superstar and divas in my room and I love when he does the spear and the superman punch Nikkibella02 (talk) 13:14, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

Add a picture of Roman Reigns with the WWE World Heavyweight Championship belt on Championships and accomplishments Ham16pedia (talk) 21:44, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

Add more movesets Ham16pedia (talk) 21:45, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

Roman Reigns now hold the WWE Intercontinental Championship. He defeated Rusev at Clash of Champions on September 25th 2016 Redbone703 (talk) 03:51, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

Criticism / quote warranted

Please discuss at WT:PW. starship.paint ~ ¡Olé! 00:52, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 9 March 2015

Just want edit his wrestling style 100101010a (talk) 00:40, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. —C.Fred (talk) 00:41, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

The Persona & Reception Section

Is it me, or does that section seem to be a bit much? I'm not saying get rid of the section, but this section takes up about half the page! In doing a spot check of his contemporaries' pages, only Ryback has a similar section, and it is much more succinct.HubcapD (talk) 07:01, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

• @HubcapD: - these kinds of sections are a work in progress. Some wrestlers receive very notable receptions, and we are beginning to include them in those articles. We just started with Ryback, now Reigns, certainly John Cena and Hulk Hogan will be forefront candidates for these sections. There are differences between Ryback and Reigns' sections though: Reigns' one talks about his character in wrestling as well - that contributes about over 150 words. Reigns' one also has those quotes which also contribute about 150 words. Furthermore, Reigns has two very distinguishing incidents on his reception: Royal Rumble 2014 (as the bad guy cheered) and Royal Rumble 2015 (as the good guy booed). I gave it a re-read, but it's not very easy to summarize. There are many different points (1. John Cena comparisions 2. limited moveset 3. poor character 4. forced promo delivery 5. pushed too hard, too soon and more) I'll see what I can do.
• I trimmed off about a 100 words and rearranged stuff such that similar stuff was put together. I'm not sure how much more could be summarized. starship.paint ~ ¡Olé! 12:52, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

@Dannys-777: - I made a mass restoral of Danny's removals. None of the removals were commentators praising Reigns, many of the removals were criticisms. Some removals seemed to me to be whitewashing - CM Punk saying Reigns was meant to be put over as strong was not a criticism. "Accusations of the WWE rigging" was not a criticism either, and that's quoted from the source. The final 3 being booed of the 2014 Rumble was gone as well. Everything removed was reliably sourced. May I point you to WP:WELLKNOWN. Roman Reigns is assuredly well known. In the case of public figures, there will be a multitude of reliable published sources, and BLPs should simply document what these sources say. If an allegation or incident is noteworthy, relevant, and well documented, it belongs in the article – even if it is negative and the subject dislikes all mention of it. If you cannot find multiple reliable third-party sources documenting the allegation or incident, leave it out. Criticism of Reigns (and his character) is well documented - and has occurred in virtually every industry specific reliable source in WP:PW/RS - except Pro Wrestling Illustrated, which is not readily available online - and even mainstream sources like TV.com. Danny - perhaps we could discuss, sentence by sentence, what to include and what not to include. Though, Whipwreck's comments are especially appropriate, given that Reigns' said that no wrestler has criticized him. starship.paint ~ ¡Olé! 02:28, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

• @Starship.paint: Criticism of Reigns is fine, and was suitably addressed in the changes that I made. I mentioned in the original debate regarding this section that I was worried it would just turn into a soapbox for posting negative articles and viewpoints in a way that contradicts WP:BALASPS. The section doesn't need article after article listing the performer's faults. It wasn't 'whitewashing' so much as providing a more balanced viewpoint. Yes, the articles included are all sourced but that isn't the issue at all, I could probably find a multitude of negative reviews about a movie I dislike for example but that doesn't mean they all need to be posted. It's especially relevant in this case as the majority of criticism seemed to be centered around the assumption that Reigns would win the WWE World Heavyweight Championship at WrestleMania 31, which didn't happen. It's absolutely not necessary to have so much content in that section, especially when the vast majority of that content represents only one viewpoint. You may dislike Reigns, you may feel that the level of criticism posted on this section is warranted but this is supposed to be an encyclopedia, not a wrestling forum. The fact is that the article as it stands violates WP:NPOV. Dannys-777 (talk) 05:58, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

• @Dannys-777: - Forgive me, I have much to address.

• Per WP:BALANCE - Neutrality assigns weight to viewpoints in proportion to their prominence. even per WP:BALASPS which you quoted, treat each aspect with a weight appropriate to the weight of that aspect in the body of reliable sources on the subject. When you said It wasn't 'whitewashing' so much as providing a more balanced viewpoint. - Wikipedia doesn't give 50% positive and 50% negative - that is false balance (WP:GEVAL). You need to understand - if the majority of RS are criticizing Reigns, Wikipedia is going to reflect that majority. For example, I can point you to the Gamergate controversy article. This article is an issue with two sides. But the majority of RS favours one side (the side that says Gamergate is about misogynistic attacks) so that article favours that side. Similarly, the majority of RS are skewed negatively towards Reigns presently. When he was with the Shield, the RS were praising Reigns, that's why there's also positive descriptions of him.
• You say that the vast majority of that content represents only one viewpoint. What viewpoint is that? Is there a single unifying viewpoint? I don't think so. Whipwreck said Reigns was like "John Cena". That's different from "forced promo delivery". That's different from "body language and facial expressions". That's different from "lacked an identity". Where's the unifying viewpoint? Also, "accusations of WWE vote-rigging", or "look "really, really strong"", or "expressed their displeasure at the final three wrestlers left" - are not viewpoints.
• You say that majority of criticism seemed to be centered around the assumption that Reigns would win ... Not really. "in-ring work is decent" was in August 2014. "forced promo delivery" was in November 2014. Reigns hadn't won the Rumble yet. "body language" was regarding Reigns as a "top babyface". Who main-evented the post-Mania Raw? It was Reigns. He's still a top babyface, even if he is not champion. starship.paint ~ ¡Olé! 12:49, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

@Starship.paint: Yes, clearly much of the RS critique has been negative, but not all of it. For example, this section includes a negative comment by Mikey Whipwreck but omits a favorable comment by a much more relevant wrestling personality in Chris Jericho. It mentions how Reigns 'almost won' an award for being overrated, is that really encyclopedic content? It mentions baseless accusations of vote rigging for an award that Reigns won (which were proved to be inaccurate by numerous RS) - it would be fine to comment that the win was a 'surprise', but the way it's currently worded is a clear breach of WP:NPOV, the section is clearly written with the intention (even if it's just a subconscious intention) of portraying Reigns in a bad light. Again, you may feel negatively about Reigns and that such a multitude of criticism is warranted, but a lot of the content in that section is not necessary from an encyclopedic standpoint. I'm fully aware of false balance, all the relevant criticisms were still included in the changes that I made - I feel that the changes accurately reflected the level of criticism toward Reigns without appearing to try and influence the reader that Reigns is a 'bad' wrestler. Dannys-777 (talk) 21:22, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

• @Dannys-777: Regarding "vote-rigging", the sentence could definitely be worded better. My point about the "vote-rigging" is that it garnered surprise to the point that there were such accusations. It's a higher level. But I get your point - we should be stressing more that reports debunked these accusations. Perhaps we could write the Observer and Insider debunked, not sure which other RS did. I have reworded.
• Whipwreck is a former ECW Champion and one of only four ECW Triple Crown Champions. I'm not sure which Jericho comment you are referring to, please post it here. I can't profess to know every single comment made about Reigns by every single wrestler. Jericho is contracted to WWE though, he's wrestled at house shows in Jan/Feb/Mar '15. It's not as if we don't have comments by other WWE employees - I added the HHH, Heyman and Henry comments, two of which are positive. Whipwreck being non-WWE is definitely a plus. But at the end of the day, if you didn't try to add the Jericho comment, then don't complain that it's not there. We could replace Heyman's comment with Jericho's, because Heyman was directly feuding with Reigns at the time of his comments, it would make sense for him to talk Reigns up to sell people on a compelling storyline.
• Regarding the Observer's 2nd Most Overrated in 2014, it's because there's a clear contrast with him winning Most Improved in 2013. Plus, Meltzer made special mention that it came down "to the final ballot" for Kane to beat Reigns - and Meltzer also analyzed why voters thought he was overrated - so it's the RS placing importance on this result. It also contrasts with the WWE 2014 Superstar of the Year.
• "body language", "promo delivery", to name a few, are certainly relevant and not mentioned anywhere else when you removed them. If RS think he is such, it is okay for us to write so as long as it is attributed as their opinion. starship.paint ~ ¡Olé! 00:45, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 14 April 2015

On the February 2 episode of Raw, Reigns lost to Big Show after a hit with the briefcase from Seth Rollins, marking the first time Reigns had lost via pinfall in a one-on-one match on the WWE main roster Killhawk (talk) 19:59, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. Amortias (T)(C) 20:27, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

• The last move before the pin was a Big Show chokeslam though, and not the briefcase. starship.paint ~ ¡Olé! 03:45, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 3 July 2015

I want to add the powerbomb to the In Wrestling section because Roman Reigns has been using the powerbomb for months now. He used one handed powerbombs since March of 2015. He used the regular powerbomb on Neville and Kofi Kingston in Money in the Bank, and powerbombed Seth Rollins on RAW June 29, 2015 and Smackdown June 2, 2015. Source:

Seth britan (talk) 22:41, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

References

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. Bazj (talk) 14:43, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

Kane

change ((Kane)) to ((Kane (wrestler)|Kane))

Done -- ferret (talk) 19:46, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 17 November 2015

I would like to edit Roman Reigns's moveset. He's expanded his moveset drasically over the year. Neckbreaker, Sideslam, Powerbomb, DDT, Diving Clothesline, Suicide Dive over top rope. It's all missing. Jay.Savage19 (talk) 17:12, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

• Not done: this is not the right page to request additional user rights. You may reopen this request with the specific changes to be made and someone will add them for you, or if you have an account, you can wait until you are autoconfirmed and edit the page yourself. --Stabila711 (talk) 19:54, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 23 November 2015

After former WWE World Heavyweight Champion Seth Rollins had to vacate his title due to knee injury, a WWE World Heavyweight Championship Tournament was created. In which Reigns defeated Big Show, Cesaro, and Alberto Del Rio. In the tournament finale at WWE's November PPV Survivor Series Reigns had to defeat his 'brother' Dean Ambrose. After a vicious Spear Reigns won the title. Triple H came after the celebration to congratulate Roman Reigns but Reigns declined and Speared Triple H instead. Following the spear Sheamus came out and after 2 Brogue Kicks to Roman Reigns left the PPV as WWE World Heavyweight Champion. Skylez - Ivious (talk) 04:14, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Not done: as you have not requested a specific change in the form "Please replace XXX with YYY" or "Please add ZZZ between PPP and QQQ".
More importantly, you have not cited reliable sources to back up your request, without which no information should be added to, or changed in, any article. - Arjayay (talk) 10:51, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Just won the WWEWHC for the second time

Roman just beat Sheamus on Raw for the WWEWHC, for his second reign in a title vs career match. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:B825:6940:251D:DED5:96CE:2D30 (talk) 04:13, 15 December 2015 (UTC)

Persona and reception

Sorry to spoil the fun, but following the reactions of 13/14 December, this assassination section will now have to be updated. DoubleYouSeaDoubleYou (talk) 11:19, 15 December 2015 (UTC)

I would advise that the content of this section be incorporated into the body of the article. Having a large blow-by-blow and constantly updated analysis of Reigns' critical reception is an obvious and awkward imbalance. JJARichardson (talk) 02:37, 19 December 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 11 January 2016

believe that ind

thank you 106.51.25.252 (talk) 15:22, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Not done: as you have not requested a specific change in the form "Please replace XXX with YYY" or "Please add ZZZ between PPP and QQQ".
More importantly, you have not cited reliable sources to back up your request, without which no information should be added to, or changed in, any article. - Arjayay (talk) 15:45, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 13 January 2016

At 11th edition of RAW , Mr.McMahon put Roman Reigns in a 'One Vs All' match ( One competitor fights multiple opponents ). During the match , Reigns's WrestleMania 31 opponent Brock Lesnar intefered and attacked al those the the ring and giving an F-5 to Reigns in the end. JMD316 (talk) 07:58, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. --allthefoxes ^(Talk) 08:14, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

• That match was week-by-week anyway. Not important enough considering long term. starship.paint ~ KO 14:20, 26 January 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 30 January 2016

Roman Reigns is a Catholic.

Exodus88 (talk) 13:17, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Cannolis (talk) 15:19, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 16th Feb 2016

I noticed that this wiki mentions his religion, but the source isn't the best - here's a source that suits better. http://www.sportskeeda.com/wwe/roman-reigns-talks-wyatt-family-feud-facing-brock-lesnar-at-wrestlemania-more — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.29.29.23 (talk) 12:32, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

Lucha de Apuesta?

I'm not certain that a 'contract vs. title' match is what is generally understood as meant by a 'Lucha de Apeusta.' Those traditionally mean Mask or Hair on the line. By this reasoning, any retirement match, loser leaves town match, or MITB defense might be called a Lucha de Apuesta. It seems to me that's missing the point. BoosterBronze (talk) 18:31, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

• Agreed, so removing. WWE doesn't specialize in lucha libre anyway. starship.paint ~ KO 12:54, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

Congrates

I am a very great fan of you may god bless you. Hassan Javed HJ 786 (talk) 13:46, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 7 May 2016

The quote at the end of the penultimate paragraph of the "Persona and reception" section – "most despised wrestler WWE has had since 1990's Sgt. Slaughter" – is patently not what the source says. Please correct to "most despised wrestler WWE has had since it turned Sgt. Slaughter into an Iraq-sympathizing traitor in 1990". Thanks. 188.208.198.224 (talk) 05:42, 7 May 2016 (UTC)

• Done. Thanks. starship.paint ~ KO 06:12, 7 May 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 21 June 2016

Example Article Name

• Example Article Name (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism.

During Reigns' match with Seth Rollins at Money in the Bank 2016, Reigns played as the heel, showing arrogance and cockyness and actually heel traits by constantly slapping Rollins. The next night on Raw, Reigns even told the fans who booed him and chanted "You can't wrestle!" to shut up. He's clearly turning heel

HygorBohmHubner (talk) 05:43, 21 June 2016 (UTC) HygorBohmHubner

Semi-protected edit request on 18 July 2016

Ramboispoo (talk) 17:12, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. Sir Joseph ^(talk) 17:30, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 23 July 2016

Senilsata (talk) 14:21, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

Not done: as you have not requested a change.
If you want to suggest a change, please request this in the form "Please replace XXX with YYY" or "Please add ZZZ between PPP and QQQ".
Please also cite reliable sources to back up your request, without which no information should be added to, or changed in, any article. - Arjayay (talk) 14:31, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

wellness suspension

What was it for? Any sources mention? I can't find this for Lesnar either. 64.231.171.158 (talk) 09:52, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

• Rumours are Adderall... no official words or confirmed stuff, so no Wikipedia mention. starship.paint ~ KO 09:03, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

Reigns "yelling at the fans" after PPV (#207)

There is only one source that claims this, no one else who was at the event has suggested this ever happened. Unless there is proof, this section should be removed.

Persona and reception split

So this section is huge and has been for awhile. Why not break it off into another article, Persona and reception of Roman Reigns?LM2000 (talk) 04:47, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

• Seems okay. How to summarize it in this article though >_> starship.paint ~ KO 13:38, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

• Below is a my rough idea of what it would look like on this article. Everything else would be transferred to the new one.LM2000 (talk) 05:21, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

Persona and reception

Main article: Persona and reception of Roman Reigns

While in NXT in 2012, Reigns' character was a "businessman" who was "always dressed to impress" and viewed himself as "the most valuable commodity in WWE". Upon his 2012 main roster debut with The Shield, Reigns was billed as a "powerhouse", "heavy hitter" and an "exceptional athlete"; in mid-2013, Reigns' character was tweaked from "the quiet muscle" to being an "ultra-confident" source of leadership with "quiet strength". During this time, Reign's character was well received by critics, and the during 2014 Royal Rumble match, the live crowd cheered for Reigns over eventual winner Batista, despite Reigns being a heel.

Following The Shield's break-up in 2014, Reigns (unlike the other former Shield members) retained much of The Shield's aesthetic, and his popularity amongst fans and critics declined. Various critics raised concerns that Reigns, despite being "not fully ready", was "being pushed too hard, too soon" while WWE tried to make him their next "flagship star", "no matter how fans reacted" negatively. In a reversal from the previous year's Royal Rumble, Reigns was booed heavily after his victory despite portraying a heroic character at the 2015 Royal Rumble. After chasing the championship unsuccessfully throughout 2015, critics described WWE presenting Reigns' character as a "hard-luck underdog" chasing the world title, with WWE having "spent an overwhelming amount of time" on Reigns, "bending over backwards to create new obstacles for him to overcome", "at the expense of almost everyone else on the roster". WWE Hall of Famers Stone Cold Steve Austin, Rikishi and Hulk Hogan have encouraged WWE to turn him heel, and after his suspension Yahoo! TV urged WWE to "quit pretending he's some kind of lovable underdog" with a heel turn for Reigns, after wasting a "dozen" chances "since the boos first reigned" at the 2015 Royal Rumble.

Merger Proposal

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

I propose that Persona and reception of Roman Reigns be merged into Roman Reigns. I think that the "Persona and Reception" article could easily be made into a section of this article. R. A. Simmons ^Talk 18:21, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

"Persona and reception of Roman Reigns" IS a section of this article. In the discussion directly above, two seasoned editors agreed that it should be a separate article; as a long-term IP editor I also agreed, and set up an account to carry out the operation. The section has outgrown this article. SierraHotelIndiaEchoLimaDelta (talk) 20:05, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

I want to thank @SierraHotelIndiaEchoLimaDelta: for making the separate article, I proposed it but never went ahead with it due to lack of response. That said, I totally support the separate article. The failed push of Roman Reigns has been the most discussed WWE topic among reliable sources in recent years. It's as notable as other wrestling controversies, such as Mass Transit incident (professional wrestling) or The Fingerpoke of Doom.LM2000 (talk) 21:04, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

Glad to help. Seemed the sensible route given that the Reigns experiment has a wealth of reliable coverage – both industry-specific and mainstream. SierraHotelIndiaEchoLimaDelta (talk) 22:03, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

@LM2000: I've read both articles, and I know about the Mass Transit incident and The Fingerpoke of Doom, and these are obviously different situations. Those other articles mark specific, significant incidents in professional wrestling history. The character of Roman Reigns, while a significant paradigm in wrestling discussion, is inherently linked to Roman Reigns. The separate article could easily be condensed into a few paragraphs in this article. I don't think it merits a separate article. Maybe we could get another opinion? R. A. Simmons ^Talk 21:30, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

As Sierra pointed out, this is a section on this article and everything in that article used to be in this one. It was a huge and in my opinion it overtook this article. I'd argue that Reigns' reception is more notable than the other two examples, as it has been an ongoing story for 2+ years. It has garnered more than enough coverage to satisfy WP:GNG, even when separated from Reigns' himself. I'd recommend asking WT:PW if you want a broader range of opinions.LM2000 (talk) 23:21, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

Also pinging @Starship.paint:, who wrote most of that section.LM2000 (talk) 23:24, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

I've requested a more qualified (than my own) opinion over there. R. A. Simmons ^Talk 18:28, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

• @LM2000 and Rasimmons: - I'm not sure how to condense it more for the old version I edited. I'm kind of busy so I'm not really looking at the article now. For the old version I contributed to, I already did some trimming. There's just so many aspects, if condensed more, you'd be missing out on content. starship.paint ~ KO 08:16, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

I think the reception and persona is fine in his own article. It would be a HUGE part of Reigns article. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 21:13, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

• I'm just against removing content. Doesn't really matter where it is. If needing content requires its own article, so be it. Barack Obama gets a ton of articles in Category:Barack Obama. Don't see why this can't be its own article. starship.paint ~ KO 08:19, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

• Merge. Jesus, the question isn't just if the section is too big but if it should even be as big as it is. As far I'm concerned half the section could be cut. There are only so many times the same thing can be repeated. He's controversial. It's not independetly notable whatsoever. Do you have any idea how controverial Justin Bieber is? That stuff doesn't have it's own article either becuse it's not independantly notable and can be condensed down to a section.*Trekker (talk) 14:10, 19 November 2016 (UTC)
• Merge, there is no need for a whole page devoted for something trivial like this, sure he may have a fan base divided like John Cena, but it's not needed to have a separate page devoted on that. just have it as a section called "Criticism of Reigns' character".Boutitbenza 69 9 (talk) 23:56, 19 November 2016 (UTC)
• Merge per nominator's rationale. The sub-article reads like a case of content being added to support sources rather than sources being added to support content. If I wanted the opinions of writers, I can find them at their websites without having to use a Wikipedia article as an intermediary step. The sub-article is a little too heavy on providing such opinions and a little too shy on providing an understanding on what issues would necessitate a separate article, especially as it concerns the difference between real life and storyline. And is David Shoemaker really an ESPN reporter or a wrestling writer who ESPN hired to write a story about a wrestling event? In the very next paragraph, he's said to have a completely different employer. RadioKAOS / Talk to me, Billy / Transmissions 00:22, 20 November 2016 (UTC)
• I disagree with the merge. It is an important issue of WWE and it's way too big to fit in Roman Reigns. Ikhtiar H (talk) 17:00, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
• No policy-based arguments given for merge. The reception for Reigns is WP:N for its own article based on a huge volume of WP:RS reporting dedicated to it. Simple as. Spin-off articles are absolutely commonplace on Wikipedia (Criticism of the BBC, Reactions to the Panama Papers), so the notion that it must remain a section of the Reigns article is poppycock. 2A02:C7F:8E43:2F00:4482:4ECA:E330:7C42 (talk) 17:02, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

I don't follow WWE much these days. From what I can tell, however, this would be comparable to the criticism of and reaction to Hulk Hogan's push in spite of his actual wrestling talent 30 or so years ago. Such a rationale is yet another case of claiming notability because we currently live in a world where a glut of media outlets exist who are desperate to create content to satisfy their readership, and that past instances don't measure up to that standard because there were fewer such outlets. That runs afoul of WP:RECENT and WP:NOTNEWS. The real test is whether or not anyone will care once these writers and outlets move on to another cause, unless you also believe that "enduring notability" are merely two words you slap together in some other discussion to score brownie points but otherwise means nothing. RadioKAOS / Talk to me, Billy / Transmissions 20:00, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

There are definitely more outlets now, but much of the Reigns reception article is built around the commentary of Wrestling Observer and Pro Wrestling Torch, who were around 30 years ago. As for recentism, this story now goes back two years, but I do agree that some of the week-by-week reporting is superfluous and should be trimmed. 2A02:C7F:8E43:2F00:4482:4ECA:E330:7C42 (talk) 20:40, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

• Keep separate Would a separate article on Hogan's push contain anything not in Hulk Hogan and 1980s professional wrestling boom? Ditto for Stone Cold Steve Austin, Dwayne Johnson and Attitude Era. A major ongoing story for 2+ years, I don't think WP:NOTNEWS applies. Splinter articles for criticism of individuals (Criticism of Akira Kurosawa, Criticism of Mother Teresa) or for public image (Public image of Sarah Palin, Public image of Rudy Giuliani) are all too common when their public reception becomes independently notable and the content too vast to adequately cover in one article. We could retitle the article and perhaps slightly retarget it as an alternative, but there's too much there to neatly transfer back here.LM2000 (talk) 22:17, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
• I'm still team Merge on this one. I think that the Persona and Reception article could and should be condensed to fit into Roman Reigns, because the two subjects are so inseparably linked. I don't think that the separate article is necessary. The new article restates a lot of the background presented in the Reigns article. As for policy arguments, WP:CRIT isn't explicit, but takes a discouraging stance on putting this much weight on reception sections and articles. R. A. Simmons ^Talk 20:13, 28 November 2016 (UTC)
• I say Merge on this one. Wikipedia is not Pro Wrestling Wikia, articles with info that can match those of the main article are not needed. Kyrios320 (talk) 08:38, 13 December 2016 (UTC)
  • Please see WP:WEDONTNEEDIT and then either come up with a better reason to support a merge or strike your vote. 184.15.187.95 (talk) 02:57, 1 January 2017 (UTC)
• Keep separate per WP:SPINOUT and WP:SIZERULE - the main Roman Reigns article is (as of this post) 107KB, and Persona and reception of Roman Reigns is at 37KB. 184.15.187.95 (talk) 02:56, 1 January 2017 (UTC)
• Merge There's no point of having a separate article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wwefan5x (talk • contribs) 19:10, 2 January 2017 (UTC)
• Keep separate - I've commented above already (but not voted). Anyway, in the interests of preserving content, I vote thus. starship.paint ~ KO 20:25, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
• Keep separate. I think people forget how massive Reigns' page was with all the criticism tacked on. It's sensible to keep the pages separate. APM (talk) 16:18, 27 January 2017 (UTC)AmorPatiturMoras
• Merge Seconding Treker's position above. BambinoPrime (talk) 19:41, 15 February 2017 (UTC)
• Keep separate per lack of policy-based arguments to the contrary, as well as the positions of LM2000 and 184.15.187.95. 159.148.89.235 (talk) 15:59, 1 March 2017 (UTC)
• Keep separate. Article is rather big don't you think? Stephen"Zap" (talk) 20:59, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

@Stephen"Zap": Did you, by any chance, read the comment (mine) directly below yours? If not, I hope you would take the time to look through it. Thanks. R. A. Simmons ^Talk 21:04, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

@Rasimmons: Oops. Stephen"Zap" (talk) 00:30, 7 March 2017 (UTC)

• Keep separate. Article far too big to be a part of Reigns' regular article, especially since it will only grow more and more in the future. Reigns seems infamous enough that it would deserve its own article. --Hyliad (d), 03:34, 7 March 2017 (CEST)
• Comment I would argue that the spirit of many Wikipedia policies points to a merge. For instance, as I stated earlier in the discussion, WP:CRIT states that a separate reception article is often used when "the primary article on a literary topic grows too large and is subject to a content fork", although it provides non-literary examples. However, what happened with this article doesn't fit the WP:CFORK bill. It states that separate articles like this are often made "when a particular controversial incident gets a lot of attention from reliable sources representing different points of view, expanding until every item of evidence is included and referenced". This isn't really the case here, as this is about the general persona and reception of Reigns (which is inherently linked to him and is part of his notability), and not a separate, independently notable event or topic. Regarding WP:SPINOUT, it states that "As browsers have improved, there is no need for haste in splitting an article when it starts getting large. Sometimes an article simply needs to be big to give the subject adequate coverage". Finally, this article probably never violated WP:SIZERULE. That policy specifically states that "These rules of thumb apply only to readable prose". I measured the readable prose size of the articles using Prosesize and found that Roman Reigns measures up at 24kB, while Persona and reception of Roman Reigns weighs in at only 13kB. Together, that's only 37kB of readable prose. According to WP:SIZERULE, "Length alone does not justify division" for articles below 40 kB of readable prose.

Thus, I restate my support for team merge, citing the article size guidelines as my policy-based argument. R. A. Simmons ^Talk 19:10, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

• I'm going to make an RfC as there is no clear consensus after a few months of discussion. I figure maybe having more editors take a look will help reach a verdict. R. A. Simmons ^Talk 05:36, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

• This thread can continue as a discussion, but future !votes should be made at #Request for Comment on Proposed Merge.LM2000 (talk) 03:15, 7 March 2017 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Date removals

• Note User:MajesticPenguin was identified as a blocked users sock here Chris "WarMachineWildThing" ^{Talk to me} 03:28, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

I've seen a series of similar edits and reverts across my watchlist today regarding removal of dates and other information. A few years ago we had a discussion about how to write about an event. While we didn't really come to any agreement there, the project over time worked out a rough consensus on how to go about it. Article size is a big problem with wrestling articles, fanboys feel the need to write down every aspect of an event.

I feel that MajesticPenguin's edit is a massive improvement as it is far more succinct. They removed excessive details; "and succeeded in doing so after beating Bryan via pinfall" became "which Reigns won", "came to an end at the hands of Team Hell No" became "ended in a loss to Team Hell No", and a description of a match as a "singles match" (which goes without saying) was removed. In one case they improved grammar (removal of "No. 1 contender") and that was also reverted.[1] Much of that discussion linked above dealt with how to write dates down. We don't describe Raw or SmackDown as weekly TV shows after every mention, so why would we do that with PPVs? A link to the article should be enough. I trimmed a a lot of bloat off AJ Styles a few months ago and most of it was with edits like these. Tagging Dane, WarMachineWildThing and MPJ-DK who had an issue with this.LM2000 (talk) 06:47, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

Here's a sample from AJ Styles:

Styles was mysteriously attacked by an anonymous assailant backstage leading him to believe it was Samoa Joe or Christopher Daniels, both of whom he faced the following month at Turning Point to retain the TNA World Heavyweight Championship.[91] He continued to successfully defend the title against Desmond Wolfe on the December 10 episode of Impact!,[92] against Daniels at Final Resolution,[93] against Angle on the January 4, 2010 episode of Impact!,[94] and against Tomko, who had been revealed as his mystery attacker, on the January 14 episode of Impact!.[95]

Is anything lost by not including, "...both of whom he faced the following month at the Turning Point pay-per-view on November 15 to retain the TNA World Heavyweight Championship.[91] He continued to successfully defend the title against Desmond Wolfe on the December 10 episode of Impact!,[92] against Daniels at the Final Resolution pay-per-view on December 20,[93] against Angle on the January 4, 2010 episode of Impact!,[94] and against Tomko..."LM2000 (talk) 07:07, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

I agree with LM2000 in that the page is more succint but all editors need to have a say in order to achieve concensus. If any other editors wish to contribute, please do as we need to achieve concensus.

Kind regards, MajesticPenguin (talk) 17:04, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

The biggest issue for me is only PPV dates were removed. If we're removing dates why were Raw or Smackdown dates not removed, kinda one sided? Also for the casual reader it should be noted when an event is a PPV and not a TV show IE: Raw or Smackdown. There are plenty of other areas that I have been asked about that probably should be cut down IE: every move they preform, every single theme song they have used, or every single nickname some announcer gives them, but without consensus I'm not removing them. I mean for example do we really need to know that "Bob" preformed 7 signature moves over his 20 year career? Do we really need 20 pics of the same person in each article? I feel like every one of the wrestling articles are getting out of control but mass edits like the ones preformed without a consensus should not be done. That's how edit wars get started. Chris "WarMachineWildThing" ^{Talk to me} 17:23, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

There are no Wikipedia pages for every episode of Raw and Smackdown, hence why they have not been removed, but I agree that they should be available for casual readers. I would like to make a suggestion to keep the year of the PPV on the link as that may assist any casual readers with a reference. However, I agree with your opinion and will stop removing PPV dates.

King regards, MajesticPenguin (talk) 17:34, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

• The one thing to take from the really long discussion from years ago that I linked above is to use variety in writing. There are times when you may have to explain a match happened at PPV; this is common with events like TLC, Hell in a Cell and Royal Rumble where the eponymous match can get confused with the PPV itself. Other times the full date may be important; one thing I disagreed with MajesticPenguin on was the removal of Reigns' debut date at the Survivor Series. It's probably a good idea to include the full date at the opening of each section so readers know where they are. The most important thing is to never be repetitive. Ever read an article that clearly got written as a story developed, like: "On the January 1st episode of Raw The Undertaker chockslammed Kane off the stage. On the January 2nd SmackDown, Kane chockslammed Undertaker through the ring. On the January 8th episode of Raw Vince McMahon booked them in a casket match at Unforgiven the Unforgiven pay-per-view on January 20th. On January 20th, Undertaker defeated Kane by locking him in a casket after a Tombstone Piledriver."? "Undertaker feuded with Kane in January 2017, culminating in a casket match at Unforgiven, where he defeated him" works much better. At least for me.LM2000 (talk) 17:56, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

LM, User:MajesticPenguin was identified as a blocked users sock here their comments should unfortunately have no bearing on this conversation any longer. Chris "WarMachineWildThing" ^{Talk to me} 03:28, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

Strange twist. It's probably for the best to move on at this point, I'll take a look at cleaning up the article somewhere down the line.LM2000 (talk) 04:18, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

Request for Comment on Proposed Merge

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Requesting comment on the proposed merge of Persona and reception of Roman Reigns into Roman Reigns. This has been discussed (for a few months) in the above section, but there doesn't seem to be a clear consensus. R. A. Simmons ^Talk 05:42, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

• Merge Summoned by bot. Based on review of the discussion above and the pages at hand, it seems as though this page could easily be condensed and merged into his BLP. Comatmebro User talk:Comatmebro 04:56, 4 March 2017 (UTC)
• Keep separate and perhaps retitle article as a compromise. I think the failed push of Reigns is a separate event and one of the most notable to come out of wrestling in recent years, enough so that The Washington Post used to it make analogies to the 2016 US election.LM2000 (talk) 03:05, 7 March 2017 (UTC)
• Pinging:@HHH Pedrigree:, @Starship.paint:, @*Trekker:, @Boutitbenza 69 9:, @RadioKAOS:, @Ikhtiar H:, @Kyrios320:, @Wwefan5x:, @AmorPatiturMoras:, @BambinoPrime:, @Stephen"Zap":, and @Hyliad:. They participated in the discussion above.LM2000 (talk) 03:09, 7 March 2017 (UTC)
• Keep separate: The article is huge. I think his negative reaction is notable enough to create his own article. Also, Reigs is young so se will have a long career, so the aritcle would be biger and biger. If the reception article is included, the entire article would be huge. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 09:19, 7 March 2017 (UTC)
• Keep separate: I agree with HHH Pedrigree. Plus trimming the contents for merging isn't a good alternative; Roman Reigns' push is a significant part of WWE. Ikhtiar H (talk) 21:14, 13 March 2017 (UTC)
• Keep separate Merge Based on review of the discussion above and the pages at hand, it seems as though this page could easily be condensed and merged into his BLP. There are also many more merge votes in above discussion on article talk page. changed opinion after review RYPJack (talk) 15:29, 16 March 2017 (UTC)

• @RYPJack: - you just copied and pasted what Comatmebro wrote, right? Because Comatmebro was "summoned by bot", but you certainly weren't. Hilarious. starship.paint ~ KO 11:02, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
• I'm not sure points are awarded for originality here. I was trying to voice agreement in a fast and efficient way but you're right, I should've made sure not to imply I was summoned by bot. You just spent a lot of time sleuthing that one out though it looks like. What did you accomplish there other than inserting conflict and derision into a space where people are trying to be productive and reach consensus? What you just did is a good example of why the pool of Wikipedia editors is shrinking while internet adoption at large is growing - editors with a vested interest in niche subject matters attacking newer Wikipedians over issues of protocol rather than doing what you could have done, which is sent me a direct message educating me on what you felt was my error in this instance. At any rate, my opinion is to "merge." RYPJack (talk) 17:26, 19 March 2017 (UTC)

• @RYPJack: I had no idea if it was an error. It was suspicious to me how you did that. I've never seen it done before. starship.paint ~ KO 12:37, 20 March 2017 (UTC)

• Keep separate in the interests of non-condensing varied, notable coverage. Would only agree to merge without trimming. starship.paint ~ KO 11:06, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
• Merge This could easily be merged into Roman Reigns, even without trimming. TBMNY (talk) 14:35, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
• Merge per RA Simmons' comment in the above section. Summoned per bot. Argento Surfer (talk) 12:33, 20 March 2017 (UTC)
• Keep separate: Nothing has changed my mind over the last two months since I last commented on this situation. It is clear that WWE will continue with the forced push of Reigns no matter what, and as such, the criticism of him will too. I think the Persona and Reception section on Reigns' article is fine right now, and any further criticism can be added to the Persona and Reception article. APM (talk) 02:47, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
• Keep separate per WP:N, WP:SPINOUT, WP:TOOBIG, WP:WEDONTNEEDIT and lack of policy-based arguments to the contrary. 159.148.89.23 (talk) 09:21, 25 March 2017 (UTC)
• Keep separate - so far, there have been no policy-based arguments in favor of keeping separate, and that includes Rasimmons' comments, which are the same only with allusions to guidelines that amount to 'it doesn't specifically say we have to, therefore we shouldn't'. I particularly disagree with his dismissal of WP:SIZERULE, as even if the article is an entire 3 KB short of the size that spinoffs are encouraged, Reigns' obviously isn't going anywhere and his article will only increase in size as his career continues - and as long as his unpopular push continues, so will any article about fan reactions to it. It also seems to me that contrary to what Rasimmons states above, the spirit of WP:CFORK is in fact in favor of a split/keeping separate, as in the lede of that guideline it says as an article grows, editors often create summary-style spin-offs or new, linked articles for related material. This is acceptable, and often encouraged, as a way of making articles clearer and easier to manage.. 184.15.236.75 (talk) 13:46, 2 April 2017 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Twin sons

Roman mentioned on a recent podcast with Chris Jericho, that his wife recently gave birth to their twin sons. This needs to be included. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lady Dragonsblood (talk • contribs) 10:50, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

Add it with a source and it will be fine.★Trekker (talk) 10:54, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

Twin Sons

The subject of Roman's newborn twin sons was discussed on the 3/31/2017 episode of Chris Jericho's Podcast, found on Podcast One. No direct details were given, such as exactly when they were born or their names. Roman just stated they were born a couple of weeks ago... with no indication of the actual date they recorded the podcast. It was very briefly discussed, and according to Roman, it was the first time he had said anything publicly about it. I gathered from the conversation, that Reigns is very protective of his family's privacy. I just thought the information needed to be added to his page, as a matter of interest. I respect The family's privacy, and names and exact ages aren't important, but it the twins are Roman's children and since Jolie is mentioned, I felt the twins should be as well. I do not have any other information than that given on the 3/31/2017 Episode of the Talk Is Jericho Podcast on Podcast one.

Thank you, Lady Dragonsblood