Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Professional wrestling

Wikipedia:PW-Nav

WikiProject Professional Wrestling
Shortcut WT:PW 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 60. Sections without timestamps are not archived.

Archives

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10
11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20
21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30
31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40
41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50
51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60
61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70
71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80
81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90
91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100
101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110
111, 112

This page has archives. Sections older than 7 days may be automatically archived by .

Pages to watch

Pages that should be watched until further notice for vandalism, unsourced statements, etc. Gail Kim, Jason Reso, Travis Tomko, Final Resolution (December 2008), Armageddon (2008), WrestleMania XXV, and the TNA World Heavyweight Championship.--WillC 21:53, 26 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm watching Armageddon (2008), there have already been several attempts to add Edge vs. Triple H vs. Jeff Hardy. While it might end up that way because of the 'tie' in the Beat the Clock match it hasn't been confirmed. Fortunatley it seems some IP edits are also taking out attempts to add this mach. None the less I'll continue to keep an eye on the article. (Loosie (talk) 13:24, 29 November 2008 (UTC))[reply]

Are your ears burning?

You crazy folks are mentioned here. Dragons flight (talk) 08:30, 27 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Are you ready for another round of the OOU Policy?

I got Over the Edge (1999) peer reviewed by an FA reviewer who knows nothing about wrestling, I think, and left a batch of comments that could do good to the project. Check it out (its the last ones on the bottom).--Tru_Co 15:02, 27 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I guess I should explain what they said. Per WP:PROSELINE and WP:PLOT, articles list to much details, and they should only explain the main parts, like how I reworded the BG section for OTE. It may suck, but it looks better in that way IMO, in addition, the aftermath should only contain info relevant to the PPV itself, so if something occurs afterwards because of the PPV, it should be noted (i.e a feud), but if someone starts a new feud, then that shouldn't be added because the PPV had nothing to do with that, see OTE's AM section for that as well.--Tru_Co 15:11, 29 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

We would also have to apply that to the background. (Fake example) In a PPV match where Shawn Michaels faces John Cena, we shouldn't include information on a Michaels vs. Jericho match two weeks earlier, unless Cena is somehow involved. iMatthew 15:59, 29 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yep. That's what I meant, for the BG section. Exactly, a match 2 weeks prior that has nothing to do with it should not be added, and if someone interfered, just state it After interference by Jericho in one of Cena's matches.--Tru_Co 16:03, 29 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Is it me or is this table better?

The tables used by the Spanish Wiki here?--Tru_Co 03:11, 28 November 2008 (UTC) Yeah its better because its in spanish lol! oj! All joking aside I like it!Adster95 (talk) 18:10, 28 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A little, why?--WillC 03:32, 29 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

They look neater and more presentable than ours.--Tru_Co 03:35, 29 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I guess we could possibly change to that format but just in my mind I don't think it will look at good or be as neat on this end.--WillC 04:00, 29 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I admit, it does look more presentable, but if we adopt it, there are two things we should drop: first, the alternating row colours, and the inclusion of a "won from" column, I think it's just redunant. I prefer having a notes column to explain special situations. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 04:08, 29 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh of course, I just thought the format of the table looked nicer. Should be adopt it?--Tru_Co 04:44, 29 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Can someone get the sytax of that table, I can't seem to find it.--S R X 03:03, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

Collaboration

I think we can all agree that progress on the current batch of collaboration articles has ground to a halt. Looking over the progress, Gino Brito was raised from a stub to a start-class article. Kamala is now up to C-class. WrestleMania 23 is almost ready for a GA nomination. The Dudley Boyz looks like it's probably ready to be reassessed, as it looks more like C-class than start-class. I know that collaborative efforts are dying down a bit, but it would be nice to select a new group of collaborations, even if it's just to give a few people something to do if they're looking for something to do. If anyone has any interest, it would be great if they could stop by the page and vote. Thanks, GaryColemanFan (talk) 03:43, 28 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree the collaboration has died down a bit. I haven't worked on many of them in a while because I've been really busy, and I already plan to work on Samoa Joe. I was going to source the Dudley Boyz's TNA section eventually and work on it. The WrestleMania article needs a few more fixes, I was going to nominate it for GA a long time ago but never finished the Reception section or took it fully out of universe. Maybe we could start voting again and choose a few new ones.--WillC 03:53, 28 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not against switching them out, either. Nikki♥311 23:07, 28 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Jason Reso

Too many rumors. Can someone help me out here. Ips and users are adding rumors he is going to WWE and his contract does not end with TNA until mid December.--WillC 00:52, 29 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Can't you ask to have a lock put on it? Nenog (talk) 02:02, 29 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have it up for protection. It still needs to be watched though.--WillC 03:32, 29 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The projects first championship list FL since March

List of WCW World Tag Team Champions was just promoted to FL status :)--Tru_Co 21:03, 29 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]

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

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)[reply]

Just because people don't like its appearance, it is no reason to substitute a vote with consensus.--S R X 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)[reply]

WWE Bad Blood (2009)

Is this happening?. Bencey (talk) 06:13, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why? Did someone add it or is there a source for it?--WillC 06:16, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, that event is not happening. Probably some website said it was taking place and that guy who created it actually believed the site. WWE would not try to cram a ppv in between No Way Out and WrestleMania.--WillC 06:24, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's been prodded.--S R X 15:26, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

Hulk Hogan biography

If anyone has Hulk Hogan's biography, I'm looking for a little information about WrestleMania IX and King of the Ring 1993. It should be on pages 214-216. Did Hogan actually refuse to lose the title to Bret Hart? If so, why? Was he specifically worried about losing the title cleanly to Yokozuna (did he help plan the exploding camera thing)? If anyone knows of a reliable site outside of WrestleView that answers these, that would be great as well. Thanks, GaryColemanFan (talk) 19:13, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Did you try Google Books? Sometimes it provides previews of sections. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 19:21, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I take that back, no preview is available. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 19:22, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's possible to piece some parts together on Google Books by typing keywords and reading part of a sentence at a time, but I couldn't get to the part I needed to see. I think I might have found something that works, though. Thanks for the help, GaryColemanFan (talk) 22:06, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

For the Shawn Michaels autobiography, it just says that Santana put him over, and that it wasn't a massive win. Thanks, Genius 101^Guestbook 23:41, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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.--S R X 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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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.--S R X 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)[reply]

General question

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

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)[reply]

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

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

Might you have recreated a deleted article? Thanks, Genius 101^Guestbook 19:59, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]

Dale Hey → Buddy Roberts

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

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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.--S R X 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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]