Talk:WrestleMania 23/Archive 1

Regarding local commercials revealing Spoilers

This is a big issue that seems to attract a lot of vandalism to upcoming wrestling event articles. The problem being that random people deliberately add matches to the upcoming event's card that have supposedly been announced on commercials aired during RAW, Smackdown!, or ECW. Once these people are confronted about their additions of these spoilers, they tend to use the commercials as their source. The problem is that they do not seem to realize that these promos shown when a WWE broadcast goes off the air during commercials are actually only airing on specific local areas and are NOT in fact being shown nation wide. WWE (at times) unintentionally releases commercials and promos on future events, spoiling matches and sometimes even their outcomes, to the specific local media outlet. This is stupidly done to attract interest from fans in that local area and increase possible attendance and buyrate figures for the upcoming event. The most recent case being the Vengeance DX promo notable for being released in some areas roughly two months before the actual event took place. Only when matches are announced on-screen by talent or during the actual WWE broadcast and NOT during commercials can this sort of information NOT be considered a spoiler. Some may argue, "So what if they aren't shown nation wide, they were still released by World Wrestling Entertainment which means they are legit and therefore all matches spoiled have a right to be added to articles!" Now the problem with that simply is this... It is unencyclopedic. You see, what these people fail to realize is that Wikipedia is NOT, I repeat, NOT a Wrestling News site. Wikipedia is not a crystal ball and therefore cannot provide spoilers on future history or events that have yet to be. Wikipedia is an internet encyclopedia, in other words, it's an ENCYCLOPEDIA. If you honestly feel the need to be an Internet Troll and add content spoiling what has yet to occur (in this case about wrestling), then please do so elsewhere such as... oh wow! ...a Wrestling News site! As best stated on Wikipedia Policy... "Before adding any sort of content, ask yourself what would a reader expect to find in an encyclopedia." ...and I highly doubt that you would be expecting to find out who will be in the main event at WrestleMania 100, even if you do happen to find a promo somewhere right now announcing it to be Hulk Hogan vs. Vince McMahon's grandson. Content such as spoilers, rumors, and other nonsense will be removed on the spot for the reasons just explained. This content simply does not comply with Wikipedia's Policies and guidelines and the addition of it is considered vandalism. Once again, please do NOT add any sort of content that even you would know is a spoiler (spoiling future history and events that have yet to be} and unencyclopedic. If you do in fact feel the need to be an Internet Troll, please do so elsewhere and not on Wikipedia. Thank you for reading and I honestly do hope that this clears up any confusion over spoilers and why they are being removed. Thank you. -- bulletproof ^3:16 20:07, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

• Thank you for posting that, although I doubt it will stop people from doing this anyways. TJ Spyke 20:12, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Yeah... I'm pretty sure they won't be giving a rat's ass any time soon. But at least they're out of excuses this time. They know that what they're doing is against policy which means if they persist, they are officially blatant vandals. -- bulletproof ^3:16 20:21, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Considering Wikipedia has its own spoilers template spoilers are not out of place here. The Wikipedia is not a crystal ball policy refers to speculation, not verified facts. Anything with a source from the WWE itself is more than appropriate to be included. It's even less encyclopedic to stick to kayfabe, since that is in effect adhereing to a make-believe world and disregarding known and proven facts. Tomtyke 10:37, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

ECW Brand Involvement

Hey, does anyone know if the new ECW brand is going to be involved in Wrestlemania now that they're a part of WWE? GunFactor007

It is WAY too early to even begin speculating whether or not the ECW brand will be part of WrestleMania 23. On a side note, speculation is not allowed on Wikipedia.3bulletproof16 03:42, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

WWE.com has confirmed that ECW will be involved with Wrestlemania 23.michaelgcuk 03:05, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Well cite your source with a link then.--

3bulletproof16 02:06, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

The SummerSlam and Survivor Series PPVs have already involved ECW. Choronically, the Royal Rumble and WrestleMania should involve ECW. 63.3.21.1 06:18, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

We shouldn't assume that though, you know what happens when you assume? TJ Spyke

I don't know if this helps, but I found an old Paul Heyman interview (before SummerSlam) saying that ECW would be participating at the major four events. Considering he was right for three of them so far, is this enough proof? --  oakster  TALK  11:41, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Logo

There is a new version of the WM 23 Logo on wwe.com [[1]].

Yeah... I put the white logo on the article because it looks better, and of course it got changed. I'm getting fed up with everything I do getting changed/removed. -- FPAtl (holla) 02:56, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Do not post matches that are not confirmed

Wrestlemania is still a long time away and the rumored Batista/Undertaker match does not belong here as it is not confirmed (and in my opinion it is a false rumor. Also, Big Show/Hulk Hogan is more likely since it has been talked about numerous times, but since not even that is confirmed, do not post it here. Only post confirmed matchups.

big-shows retired now so the match might not happen anyway (god i hope not its obvious that big show will domnate till hogen hulks up and body slams him jr:"oh my god")sailor cuteness-ready for love 23:54, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

He's not retired, he said he's taking some time off to heal. TJ Spyke 00:04, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Deleted the rumored matches section. Mr. Papaya 16:31, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Big Show, last I heard, was scheduled for time off to heal, but decided on permanent retirement. Judging by otehr rumors/last week's raw, it seems Khali will take his place, although that is also unconfirmed and thus should not be added.

As for Batista/Taker being a false rumor, this week's SmackDown indicates otherwise ;) :P. Koberulz 07:06, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Running Time

WWE.com has a wallpaper up saying the event will start at 7pm. Is this the first since XX to go over three hours, or have they all been at least 4 since then? Asking because I saw the running time mentioned for WrestleMania XX in it's article and figured if this one is running past 3hrs, it would be worth a mention. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.161.85.160 (talk) 06:52, 5 January 2007 (UTC).

Last year was 4 hours as well because they had HEAT start at 6PM, i'm pretty sure WM 21 was 4 hours long as well. TJ Spyke 07:21, 5 January 2007 (Ui

Every 'Mania since 2000 has run over 3 hrs. XX was the longest at just under 5. X-Seven, X8, XIX, 21 and 22 all were around 4. Mania 23 should also be 4 hours. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.215.140.93 (talk • contribs)

Older logos for the event

Is it worth adding lniks/images showing earlier versions of the logo for the event? I've seen links/images on other Wikipedia pages for Wrestlemanias that show older/alternate logos. Would they have a place here too? Gothekain 20:38, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism

I serously recommend we block this page, this is getting out of hand. Iv'e warned User:Eddie619 twice today. I could use some help please. Killswitch Engage

Semi-protecting will just stop IP'S and accounts less than 3 days old. The best way to deal this Eddie guy is to continue giving warnings, and to report him if he keeps it up. TJ Spyke 03:53, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Guess wat someone just replaced the entire page with Fart!Someone has to stop this!Party29 23:18, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Request for VandalProof

Seems like everyone wants to go ahead and start the vandels on this article. I've had to fix four vandals within a 10-minute time span. --Raderick 03:57, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Undertaker vs. TBA

I really think this should be added (like I had it and was removed). As of now, The Undertaker is CONFRIMED to wrestle at WrestleMania against an unnamed opponent (either the WHC, WWE Championship or ECW Championship holder) unless he loses his spot via a match (see: Rey Mysterio). --Raderick 04:37, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

I am not totally sure one way or another. I suppose I could accept "TBA vs. The Undertaker" (since the champ is always listed first). There is no guarantee Batista will still be the champ or that 'taker won't choose the WWE or ECW titles. TJ Spyke 04:44, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Well then, I guess we will go with that then. Killswitch

Please see Talk:WrestleMania 23#Regarding local commercials revealing Spoilers. thank you. -- bulletproof ^3:16 05:27, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

How is saying The Undertaker vs. TBA a spolier? We know he's wrestling for a championship of one form or another by virture of winning the Royal Rumble. I'll give you one big recent example. PRIDE FC announced that Wanderlei Silva is going to fight at the PRIDE 33 show, but no opponent was announced for weeks. --Raderick 18:50, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Though it's not proven, it would probably be a safe bet that the Undertaker will win either way. Since I doubt they would give him a loss this far into his career at Wrestlemania. Only way I can see him not winning the title is if he wins by DQ or somehow loses his title shot in a match with that as a stipulation.

I'm gonna agree with Raderick here. It's not a spoiler if we know at least one of the participents in the match. As of right now, it is The Undertaker vs. TBA for an undetermined World Title. Killswitch

I can understand that the Undertaker is confirmed, but there are too many variables to fully confirm the match, let alone what the match actually is, and who it's against. For now, I feel that a line in the main heading can state that the Undertaker is to participate in the main event as a result of his victory at the Royal Rumble. Gothekain 02:02, 30 January 2007 (UTC)