Talk:CM Punk

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the CM Punk article.
This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.
Article policies
Good article CM Punk has been listed as a good article under the good-article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can delist it, or ask for a review.

This article must adhere to the policy on biographies of living persons. Controversial material of any kind that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libelous. If such material is repeatedly inserted or there are other concerns relative to this policy, report it on the living persons biographies noticeboard.
Comment This article is a frequent target for editors to add a week-by-week synopsis of kayfabe events, unconfirmed information, rumors, and other content inappropriate to an encyclopedic article. Please make sure to familiarize yourself with what Wikipedia is not, and consider whether your additions to this article will serve to make the article larger and harder to edit for style, clarity, and grammar.

Contents

[edit] TNA and ROH

Punk was only in TNA for a short time, where as he was a big part of ROH. Could somebody please devide them into two seperate sections? Kris_Classic

[edit] What about MWF

What about his time in Maniac Wreslting Federation? Someone add this please

Most of his stuff isn't covered because it isn't notable, if you look at his championships there are many listed that aren't even referenced because his only real notable federations are IWA:MS, RoH, TNA and ECW. Arguably his time in Full Impact Pro could be added but beyond that nothings really more notable. --- Lid 18:52, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] HE DID NOT LOSE HIS OVW TITLE

He lost his WWE title shot against Rey which is what he and Seth were wrestling for. HE DID NOT LOSE HIS OVW BELT HE IS STILL OVW CHAMPION. This needs to be changed...


[edit] Backyard

No mention of his time in the Lunatic Wrestling Federation before he turned pro?

Feel free to add info on his backyard wrestling days if you have it.
↪Lakes (Talk) 19:43, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

Not to refute that LWF was a backyard promotion, but the reason given for it being one in the latest revision is totally inaccurate. Lots of independent promotions only use local guys and no fly-ins, doesn't make them yarders. --David Bixenspan 15:58, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

I was in the Chicago area around the time LWF was big in the Chicago scene. I never attended a show but would listen to their hypeline occasionally. There is a good chance that they may have been a legit fed for a while since they ran shows out of a park district. Here is some more info from 411mania

"Billy Whack chimes in on some C.M. Punk lore…My name is Billy Whack, and I used to own and promote the Lunatic Wrestling Federation in Chicago. (1993-2004)

.... And I'll never forget the day we came up with "Punk" also... It was a rainy day at All American Comics, where I worked...And I had invited a 14 year old Phil Brooks (a regular at the shop) to hang out with us over the weekend and maybe referee one of our backyard matches. (The LWF was "backyard" from 93-97, and legit thereafter) He asked to "wrestle", and I suggested he be a heel version of the 123 Kid. (93, remember?) We would simply call him--"The Punk." and we did, till about 1996." ([1])

Maybe there are some other people from the area who know better. I'm sure when Punk was in it it was backyard for most of the time...

--RedBirdI55 18:35, 30 October 2006 (UTC)


Anyone know what his OVW Theme song is?

He uses the AFI song he used in ROH 216.163.119.10

[edit] Requested move

Phil Brooks → CM Punk – Has gone by the name CM Punk since at least the age of 17, and even in shoot interviews refers to himself as Punk. Punk also views negatively people who refer to wrestlers by their real name rather than ring name, though doesn't mind if you know the real name. Also seems to be supported by WP:NAME. --- Lid 03:01, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Survey

Add *Support or *Oppose followed by an optional one-sentence explanation, then sign your opinion with ~~~~
  • Support per Lid Tromboneguy0186 07:55, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Support per Lid. I was going to request this myself as well. --Oakster (Talk) 13:27, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Support per nom.
    ↪Lakes (Talk) 13:31, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Neutral. While "CM Punk" is undoubtedly the usual spelling of his name (as with "BG James"), "CM" is an abbreviation, so to be grammatically correct, the page should really be at "C.M. Punk" or "C. M. Punk". I'm not sure what the usual convention is in a case like this. McPhail 18:03, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment: It hasn't been acknowledged as an abbreviation publicly after his backyard wrestling days.
↪Lakes (Talk) 07:53, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment: Punk doesn't have a career outside of wrestling and refers to himself as Punk outside of wrestling even though he doesn't really follow kayfabe that much. --- Lid 00:05, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
Yeah, but what I was referring to was not careers outside of wrestling, rather the focus of the discussion. Phil Brooks is the man's name; C.M. Punk is the wrestling character he plays. The article is not actually about C.M. Punk, it's about Phil Brooks. So, it should stay under Phil Brooks. Tuckdogg 01:07, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Reply: The Rock is borderline, since he has actually been using "The Rock" regularly as a stage name since retiring (although he seems to be moving towards Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson now...). The rest should all be moved to their real names. Really, though, you can't just link to some of the wrestlers' pages and say "These guys are indexed under their real names, so we should move this guy, too!" I'd be willing to bet that every one of those pages has a "Move this page" debate ongoing, as do all the pages of wrestlers indexed under their real names (which, to be honest, is a much larger list). I think what really needs to be done here is to get down a specific policy for how to treat wrestlers, and then stick to that unless there's a compelling reason not to (e.g. Chris Jericho should probably be indexed under Jericho regardless of any policies, since he owns the name and uses it as a stage name in a variety of contexts outside of wrestling). Tuckdogg 14:59, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Support. FPAtl (holla) 04:53, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Support Everyone calls him Punk, in shoot interviews and otherwise. "CM" is not really an abbreviation, either, and is the official spelling of his name (check ECW.com for support).

[edit] Discussion

Add any additional comments
The nominated move was approved 06:39, 3 July 2006 (UTC). Please do not alter archived discussion.
↪Lakes (Talk) 11:05, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment: No offense, Lid, but when we're in the middle of discussing page moves, AND right in the middle of hammering out a policy of how to properly index wrestlers on WP:PW:Talk, it's not really cool to move pages around. You could have at least waited until the policy was decided. Tuckdogg 13:09, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
Regardless of what RM says about when a move can take place, that doesn't necessarily mean that a move is the wise decision in the middle of a policy debate on a related page that, depending on how it is resolved, could cause your move to be reverted. I would think it wiser to resolve the policy debate first, then work on moving pages. Tuckdogg 21:41, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] CM Punk or Punk, CM?

There is some debate over whether CM Punk counts as a ring name ala the Ace Crusader or if it's a first name last name ala C.W. Anderson. It's known CM stands for Chick Magnet, making it Chick Magnet Punk. Should it be listed as CM being the dominant part in an alphabetical listing, or the Punk being the dominant? --- Lid 09:14, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

It's not like Punk is a last name, so CM Punk, not 'Punk, CM'.
↪Lakes (Talk) 13:39, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
Well it's not a first/last name deal OR an abbreviation. The origins of a name are different from the identity of a name, it does not currently stand for anything. If it did, it would be spelled "C.M. Punk" instead of "CM Punk."

[edit] Face or Heel?

Is Punk a face or a heel? I don't get it. --Ed-kipedia 02:20, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

He's whichever you want him to be. --- Lid 08:52, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Devil Lock or Devilock?

Recently I have come to realise that Punk's move, currently listed as the Devil Lock may in fact be a reference to The Misfits song and hairstyle, Devilock. Punk has always had an affinity for the Misfits however Devil Lock would make more sense grammatically. Any opinions? --- Lid 12:21, 16 July 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Pepsi Tattoo & WWE music

His Pepsi tat currently has Hart foundation style wings coming off it, and during both promos "This Fire Burns" by Killswitch Engage has played. I think this might be his WWE music.

And your point please

[edit] Signature Moves List

The signature moves list is way too long. It looks to me like a fan of his just made a giant list of all the moves hes ever done. Signature moves, by definition, are special moves that are done frequently by workers in almost every match. It looks like someone just added every move CM Punk has ever done to that list. Can we cut it down? He doesn't need 1,000 holds like Dean Malenko. 65.30.40.87 13:13, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Most of it came from Punk's website with a few exceptions from OWW and observation, but i'll see what I can remove --- Lid 14:13, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Unused Photo

I just wanted to point out that I found a photo on Wikipedia of CM Punk that isn't being used: Image:Cmpunkwwe.jpg SilentRAGE! 03:04, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Someone changed the TNA profile image to that once but it was changed back because despite what it claims that's an image of Punk in RoH, not WWE. Punk has never had blonde hair in WWE. Due to that the TNA one was put back in as it's a better profile image and higher quality, and as the image illustrates nothing of importance it's left out of the article. --- Lid 03:19, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
Then doesn't it need to be deleted if it's not in use? I was pointing it out, just incase somebody needed to use it or not. SilentRAGE! 09:39, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

The picture is verry pixleated.....Please get new pic.Perferably a pic of him in his white outfit in the extreme elimation chamber

[edit] Passed GA

This article is comprehensive, well-illustrated well-sourced and fairly readable. While I wish it weren't so heavily reliant on the one wrestling site, it at least cites it frequently. I consider it a Good Article. Good job, editors.

It could be a featured article, if more diverse sources were found, there was more info on his personal life and history outside of wrestling, some sections were moved around and some rough spots in the prose cleaned up. Keep at it. Daniel Case 03:54, 20 September 2006 (UTC)


[edit] New Picture?

I've noticed that most, if not all, of the Wiki articles on current WWE wrestlers have a current WWE picture (whether it be a publicity still from their website, or a picture from their house shows) in their infobox. Should the Punk picture be changed to a current WWE still? PunkCabana 21:52, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

A WWE picture was tried at one point, but it didn't scale down or whatever as good as the current one does. And just my opinion, but there's probably not a better picture to use. The current one is really good. Calaschysm 22:30, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Ah, gotcha. I read a little disclaimer thing while going in to make a few edits saying not to replace the image anyway. PunkCabana 00:17, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Finisher Move

Considering the Fact in ECW(WWE) he has still not used Pepsi Plunge shouldn't his Ura-nage(Side Slam) be move up towards a finisher

That is against the policies of the wrestling wikiproject, moves are not degraded. The ura-nage has never been used to finish the match, only to set up the finisher, thus it is a signature move and not a finisher in itself. –– Lid(Talk) 02:45, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
Still. It ought to be made notable that the ura-nage slam is more than just another move he frequently uses. He sets up his finishers with it. I'm not saying to put it up to finisher status. I'm saying that if I were trying to edit it right now, I'd move it higher on the list of signature moves than all of the moves he hasn't given a name (and possibly some of the ones he has). —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 172.165.158.168 (talk)
Moves are in alphabetical order. Named signature moves are placed above unnamed signature moves. It's unnamed and starts with 'u.' That's why it's at the bottom of the list. Calaschysm 07:56, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Too many references

What's with all the references? Every other sentence has one. Not every match result needs a link. Comprehensive is cool, but this is going overboard. It makes editing hard. I think most of them should be removed. Maestro25 23:22, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

It really doesn't make editing hard, but whatever. If you want to take the references down, feel free to do so. I personally feel it would cheapen a good article, so I won't take any down. Calaschysm 00:23, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
I agree with that there are too many references. We're talking about a fairly new wrestler who has a cult following of a few hundred fans. It does make it really hard to edit, and it isn't necessary to have 80 references (most of which are websites anyway) for someone like this. 69.209.113.141 22:23, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
I agree that there are too many references.67.86.149.41 07:05, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

If the references are good, then there is no such thing as too many. -- THL 07:08, 19 December 2006 (UTC) I'm so glad alot of the references have been taken down. Alot of them were week-by-week results and fairly annoying. 124.187.70.151 01:15, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Oh, if they were w-b-w results then yeah, they were bad. Disregard my last statement. -- THL 01:21, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] WHAT HAPPENED

What happened to the page? It looks so...empty.--989 RVD 21:37, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

It was vandalized; I fixed it. -- THLCCD 21:41, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Vandalized as "Drunk"

I'm reporting this that 202.89.150.42 has vandalized CM Punk's profile as Drunk. Someone please warn him? http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=CM_Punk&action=history --Dekabreak101 21:32, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

  • What was 202.89.160.42 thinking? Idiot.--989 RVD 00:02, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

See WP:DENY. Cheers, -- THLR 02:22, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Nice Try

I don't know who wants or feels CM Punk is an atheist but I haven't found any evidence to support this and that also doesn't really fit with any straight edge type of thing. I don't think he belongs in that category until real supporting evidence is provided. I know for some it's "cool" these days but some stranger doesn't have the right to say what religion some other person follows. I mean I could go change the Marilyn Manson page to make him a Muslim and who knows what he really follows. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.233.167.166 (talk)

To quote his LiveJournal: "There is no god, and the cage wasn't 30 feet." It wouldn't have stayed on this page so long if someone was just making it up. Calaschysm 10:34, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

So that alone makes him atheist, I guess it's not really a battle worth fighting since none of us really know him and the definition of atheist is not very definite, some atheists still believe in spirits and what not. He is a good wrestler, I can say that much.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.233.167.166 (talk)

He is in fact an atheist, although I am not really sure if he has any side beliefs or whatever. I guess you would have to know him personally to figure that out. As far as the Marilyn Manson thing goes, let's just say he studied theater very well in school. RankRabbit 19:27, 12 December 2006

If he says that he is an atheist, then who are we to question? -- THL 01:35, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

AGAIN! We're using one quote which doesn't sound like he was speaking in all seriousness to automatically assume that he is atheist. Obviously he's gone on wild tangents before. Not only has he not exactly said outright "I am atheist", or "I don't believe in God or anything like that", but mentioning that "there is no god" while in the same short sentence talking about a steel cage doesn't exactly seem to be concise proof to me. It sounds more like a ranting comment than proof of anything. 172.161.72.39 18:57, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Wow someone else supports me on this one and now that I think about it why don't I slap a big AMERICAN CHRISTIANS on say Bobby Lashley because I saw him bow his head in a public prayer once. Isn't that legit? I'm sure I could find the television footage and isn't that just as good as a quote? I'm starting to lose faith in wikipedia for providing accurate information, it's most obviously not fact. Why don't we put Atheist on Trent Reznor, because he isn't one but he has made songs that may suggest that. Another example is Woody Allen, people say he's an atheist but not too long ago I heard him talking about his religious practices that he still does, for those who don't know he's jewish. I don't think it's right to put someone in this category unless we have solid proof of this. The bot can slap the sig on here, bye

Well, the bot won't always slap sigs on, so always sign your comments. Now, to return to the discussion, you make a good argument, and I will remove him from the category. Also, you should never trust a Wikipedia biography on a living person, as we have so many rules to follow that it is almost impossible to get them completely accurate. However, everything else is reliable. -- The Hybrid 03:31, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Awsome, someone understands for once. It is amazing how many people go to wikipedia for "factual" information and that's what I was concerned about. As for my sig I'm too lazy to sign in so copy paste and bang .—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.233.167.166 (talk)

You don't have to sign in to sign your comments, just hit the button to the right of that no-smoking sign with the W in it. Easier then copying and pasting in my opinion. Cheers, -- The Hybrid 05:56, 6 January 2007 (UTC)


Actually, he has publicly stated that he is an atheist. Check his site in the "ask Punk" section. He says something similar to "I don't believe in a big man in the sky that rules over everything." -Nairanvac

I checked the website and there is nothing like what you have stated. There is something where he expresses his disapproval of the "religious right" but there are even religious people who don't agree with the majority "religious right" I mean look at Jay Bakker.--66.233.167.166 07:40, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

"And you go home and pray to a God I know doesn't exist." - CM Punk, Ring of Honor - Night of Champions -March 22, 2003
"I can't even believe anybody would believe ANY of these myspace account are mine. Kids: someday?!?!? Religion: Christianity?!?!? What in the blue (faker!) hell!?" - CM Punk, cmpunk.com
"Fuck the religious moral majority, let whoever wants to marry whoever, get the fuck married. I love the moral high horse hypocrisy bullshit. I know super religious pricks do tons of steroids, but a homosexual life style to them is reprehensible. Fuck that." - CM Punk, cmpunk.com
"The atheist screaming "Oh My Fucking God"" - Dave Prazak, CM Punk vs Chris Hero - TLC Match\
And the previously mentioned "there is no God" comment in his open letter to Teddy Hart. He's an atheist. –– Lid(Talk) 10:13, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

By the way, there really isn't a cmpunk.com right now, so your quotes aren't credible unless you have some documentation or we can just make him a satanist or something, I mean this is wikipedia...

Well it is here http://www.cmpunk.com/. The myspace line is from a post of his on his forums here and the "religious moral majority" rant is from his "Ask Punk" section here. –– Lid(Talk) 05:40, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

So now explain how the last couple things prove anything because I have already went over this once and there was no definite answer.--207.190.61.122 08:04, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] A question...

Just a wild stab in the dark here, but shouldn't the uranage be put under the finishers section since CM uses it as a precursor to his Anaconda Vice? -- Jลмєs Mลxx™  Msg me  22:33, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

He hasn't used it to finish a match. Cheers, -- THL 02:11, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Ohhhh, I getcha. -- Jลмєs Mลxx™  Msg me  02:13, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

But that's actually a good point. The Uranage is a direct setup to the Anaconda Vice. It should be alot higher on the list than the last signature move, probably at the very top of the signature moves list. 172.161.72.39 18:59, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

To quote myself from a slightly higher topic about his moves:

"Moves are in alphabetical order. Named signature moves are placed above unnamed signature moves. It's unnamed and starts with 'u.' That's why it's at the bottom of the list." He's also used the anaconda vice without setting it up with a uranage, so it's not necessarily used to set it up every time. Calaschysm 20:43, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] ROH In ECW

in punks ECW debut the fans aknowlegd him from ROH.this should be noted —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jacob Richardson (talk • contribs).

Unless it is officially acknowledged by either WWE or ROH it counts as OR. -- THL 21:40, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

i meant the ECW fans chanted "ROH" and "Ring Of Honor" ad there were alot of fan signs for punk with the pepsi logo,i think this should be noted.it was in WWE ring.{{Jacob Richardson 02:00, 28 December 2006 (UTC)|Jacob Richardson}}

No special mention is made on people's pages who migrated from (the original) ECW to WWE and ECW was chanted. Having ROH chanted for a wrestler in WWE is not really notable.
↪Lakes (Talk) 23:51, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
Jacob, I knew exactly what you were saying. What I was saying is that unless WWE or ROH acknowledge that the fans were chanting ROH, then for us to say that they were chanting it in the article counts as OR. I also agree with what Lakes said above. Also, could you please sign your comments by typing ~~~~ please? Cheers, -- THL 01:39, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Personal Information is Libelous

My name is Chris Kowalski. Phil Brooks is my nephew. I would like to point out many inconsistencies in his biography. First of all...he has no sisters. Second of all, and most importantly, his father is not an alcoholic, never has been. Thirdly, his brother, never stole or embezzled monies from LWF. Points 2 and 3 are considered libelous. Cgkowalski 22:30, 28 December 2006

Response

1: To quote him during the Ring of Honor CM Punk/Samoa Joe Shoot Interview: "I got two little sisters in Chicago." He also references a little sister in his LiveJournal. See: http://cmpunk.livejournal.com/14709.html

2: He says in this interview (http://sports.ign.com/articles/748/748635p3.html), among others, that his father is an alcoholic.

3: He says in this interview (http://members5.boardhost.com/wrestlingnews/msg/62.html) that his brother "stole $7,000 from the LWF." Former tag team partner CM Venom also says that his brother embezzled money (http://web.archive.org/web/20040222144349/http://www.chicagowrestling.com/AL/al-cmvenom-12-17-01.htm).

This leads me to various conclusions:

1: He is using "sister" in a liberal sense, and it refers to relatives or other girls close to him. He says that his father is an alcoholic in various sources while working for various companies to stay in character in an otherwise out-of-character interview. He says that his brother stole money for no apparent reason.

2: He is a liar.

3: You are not his uncle and/or have no idea what goes on in your family, no offense intended.

Options one and two seem unlikely, given what I know about the guy. Maybe I'm missing something here, but unless you can provide information that says otherwise (which I would be very interested in), there is no reason to remove anything from this article. Calaschysm 04:40, 29 December 2006 (UTC)


Response

You obviously DON'T know him and have to read outdated internet sources. If you truly know him...call and ask him who I am. I know I just did and while you may not believe me, undoubtedly you will believe anything you read on the internet from the comfort of your mom's basement, no offense intended. I have contacted wikipedia with my personal information and have requested that this information be deleted. Phil has also contacted them. It's called "image" and sometimes image becomes very confused with truth. Watch what you print...it's libel and punishable by law. Cgkowalski 23:14, 28 December 2006

Response Outdated internet sources? His shoot interview is a video, as in he says it on camera that he has two sisters. His LiveJournal is his LiveJournal, no reason for that to be an "outdated internet source." The IGN interview is from this month, and the WWE magazine article is recent as well and not an internet source. Please provide better proof for your arguments. Adding comments like "comfort of your mom's basement" does not help your argument any. Calaschysm 05:21, 29 December 2006 (UTC)


Response

Blogging and internet articles are not promulgated materials. IGN and WWE articles are like reading comic books. Phil is a good actor and even a better liar. He was raised in Homer Glen, a rich suburb of Chicago, in a $300,000 house, as far from poor as anybody I know. He sets up a great image...but the downside is that his family's name is being dragged through the mud for no reason. Everything he says in those articles (and he has mentioned to me many times how he enjoys making stuff up as he goes along) just adds fuel to an image he has to maintain. I hold my family's name very dear. We are a tight knit family and have remained quiet over his musings in the wrestling community. But Wikipedia is an encyclopedic reference and this has gone far enough. His grandparents (my parents) are concentration camp survivors and fought very hard to provide a life for his mother and I in this country. His father is a hard working man who provided everything for his son. His brother encouraged and supported him in his early years as a backyard wrestler. Joking around in the wrestling community is one thing, but printing those lies as truth on a world stage is another. I am asking you to please remove this information out of respect for my family.Cgkowalski 00:02, 29 December 2006

Response No offense, but people have been impersonated on this website before. What you say seems believable, likely even, but for all I know you're just someone who wants to mess around. Even if he does go around making stuff up for interviews, why would CM Venom bring up Mike Broox stealing from LWF? He says he doesn't like CM Punk and would have no reason to go along with a lie. My main problem is that there are multiple sources for everything he's saying, and nothing on your side. Everything you have a problem with is stuff that he has said, none of this is made up by someone here. If you want the stuff removed, feel free to remove it. Someone else can deal with whether it stays or not. Calaschysm 06:31, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Comment

Alright, alright, alright. Enough from both of you. If you are who you say you are, and Mr. Brooks has indeed contacted Wikipedia, then this whole thing will be taken care of by the end of the week by Wikipedia staff. Please don't remove the content yourself, as until your side has been proven it will be considered damaging the article by removing cited content. We have no way of knowing if you really are Mr. Brook's uncle, but Wikipedia staff does, so this whole thing will soon be sorted out. As far as us regular users are concerned, and that includes you Cgkowalski aside from any future contact you have with the Wikipedia staff, this thing is finished. It is now in the hands of the staff, so discussing these things here is pointless. Cheers, -- THL 06:37, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Please, everyone, have a look at WP:RS. If something is not citeable from a reliable source then it cannot be in the article. In-character interviews and such really don't count, because CM Punk is playing as his character (and lying about the backstory), rather than telling the truth about himself. --Cyde Weys 06:49, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

It has been noted many times that his real life personality and his CM Punk character are very similar. As such, we have no way of telling what is lie and what is true when it comes to his personal life. -- THL 07:03, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

If you can't tell what is truth and what is a lie then why do you publish anything under his personal life? Shouldn't that fall into a category of personal quotes rather than fact based biography?Encyclopedias are based on truth, not speculation. I used to use this source in my classroom but not anymore. If this is truth how many other articles on this site are written with such abandon? Cgkowalski 01:10, 29 December 2006

Wikipedia even says that it isn't an academic source. However, most articles about people that aren't alive are indeed totally reliable. Biographies of living persons are very touchy to write and keep. In my opinion, when the source must be reliable, go to the external links and references of the article to get the sources. Also, apply a level of common sense to what you are looking at. Take what you already know about something, and filter what you are reading through it. Remember, Wikipedia is a work in progress. A collection of all human knowledge is the goal, not the current reality. -- THL 08:40, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
The only source we have on the comments of Kowalski is himself, assuming what he is saying is true. That itself fails WP:RS as all we have here is claimed truths against the person themselves own words. The claims of libel in regards to BLP are libel against the person in the article, not the claims they make. –– Lid(Talk) 17:04, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
Nobody that actually knows Punk ever calls him Phil. --David Bixenspan 01:31, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
Excellent point David, I don't know who this Kowalski guy thinks he is but I dont believe u are CM Punks uncle for a few reason.
1. You called Punk by his first name Phil which almost all wrestling fans know that wrestlers go by their ring name outside the ring I've read on many sites that he goes by Punk not Phil.
2. If u keep saying that these sources are no good which they are, why dont u provide us with a source that says otherwise.
3. U are so full of it. I hate vanalists who have nothing better to do than ruin good pages. I feel sorry for all the guys who have argued with a pretender who is just full of bull.--24.184.169.37 02:33, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
Well, we are required to assume good faith, or pretend to ;) -- The Hybrid 23:23, 11 January 2007 (UTC)


First of all...I'm not his uncle. I'm his aunt. We call him Phil because in our FAMILY we call people by their REAL names...not by what they do for a living. For instance...no one calls me TEACHER. Phillip Jack Brooks is his baptismal name. I am not a wrestling fan therefore have no need to call him PUNK. How stupid are you? Do you really think his parents and grandfather call him PUNK? We never have called him PUNK unless we were at a match in his early days. I'm not a pretender...I am who I say I am. If you would like proof I can post the pictures of him and Maria at my house for Christmas Eve dinner or the dozen or so photos I have of him at matches with his family. I'm not here to ruin a page. Just clarify information about his family. It's people like you, who fawn over celebrity and know nothing about a person's real life that discredit this content. Get a life and try to follow Wikipedia's guidelines of not being nasty. I've already contacted Wikipedia about this content and so has Phil (PUNK)...we are still waiting for a reply.Cgkowalski/Cgkowalski 16:31, 17 January 2007

OK Thats A Good Point. I Just Dont Like The Tone You Used Towards This User. You Are Of Course Phil's Family And You Obviusley Have The Right To Refer To Him By His Real Name. But In The Wrestling Industry Kayfabe Plays A Very Important Part. If I Was At A Show And Called Phil By His First Name He Would Either Egnore Me Or Be Very Offended. I Belive That The Comments Above To The Wikipedia User Were Unessecary , Reffreing To Someone "People Like You" And "Get A Life" Can Be Classed As Personal Attacks. Sorry Ms.Brooks But It Is My Duty As A Wikipedian To Point This Out, Thank You (Id Rather Be Hated For Who I Am, Than Loved For Who I Am Not 04:16, 31 January 2007 (UTC))

No, it wasn't your duty to point it out. If you look at this user's contributions, it is obvious they had no intentions of editing elsewhere, so future comments like this wouldn't be a problem. Sometimes it is just better to let dead dogs lie. It is random comments like this that made me play the role of peacemaker so I could declare this conversation closed again. Please, no one reply to this person's message. This conversation has been meaningless from the beginning, and it needs to die. This Cgkowalski will never convince us that she is Punk's aunt, so the only way is to use the appropriate channels, which she says that she has done. Seeing as the appropriate people have been contacted, there is nothing more that we can do here. So basically, no more discussing this. It is a waste of time. Cheers, -- The Hybrid 05:36, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

I agree that it is immature for anyone who has never met him personally to feel that they know what he is called by his family. Also, I apologize for assuming that you were male. I know so many Christophers I forgot about Christine. Anyway, I would like to officially declare this discussion closed. If you and Mr. Brooks have indeed contacted Wikipedia, then this will be sorted out by them. Obviously I overestimated their speed, but they will sort this out. -- The Hybrid 22:45, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] ROH and OVW

Do these sections really matters? Other wrestlers pages only give a short reference to indy feds worked for. Plus, the week by week here is unnecessarily extensive. If it's all the same, I'd like to remove most of it and shorten it down to a paragraph or two. --Maestro25 07:24, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

That'd probably work. More extensive detail could be gone into on a Wikia, where detail is allowed. --Calaschysm 08:05, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

The thing is, though, that his run in ROH was a really big part of both his career and the history of the company. His OVW run should maybe be cut down, but I think his ROH section should remain detailed. 70.130.144.187 00:26, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] His new finisher

He used KENTA's Go 2 Sleep on ECW to beat Johnny Nitro. Should that be mentioned? 24.34.81.232 18:57, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Not just yet, if he continues to use it as his finisher, yes. But not yet because he's only used it once so far, to say it has become his finisher without him using it more often would be speculation at this point. Bmg916 Speak to Me 19:00, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

I don't see why we can't mention it, since it's pretty outstanding. So long as we say he used it and not that its his finisher we should be fine for now. Also, is it just me or did you all mark out when he did it as well? 22:53, 21 February 2007 (GMT +0) Infernix.

It doesn't matter how outstanding the move is, he only used it once. Until he uses it more and absolutely establishes it as a finishing maneuver, we can't put it in. Putting it in as a finisher now would amount to speculation, and Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. Bmg916 Speak to Me 01:27, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Its not a matter of whether or not the move was outstanding. Consider that Punk used it to finish his match in the WWE against Johnny nitro. This is significant because the WWE as a general rule of thumb doesn't use a move to finish a match unless it is actually a wrestler's finishing maneuver. There are exceptions to the rule, such as psychological warfare or a squash match, but this is hardly the case here. Punk is not trying to get into a feud with KENTA (sadly) and it certainly wasn't a squash. That Punk defeated a former IC champ in a match to determine the participant in a Wrestlemania match that determines a strong #1 contender is enough to validate his use of the go2sleep as a finisher.--58.108.121.185 10:39, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Yes, he used it as a finisher ONCE. As for whether or not he will use it again, even though there is a strong possibility he will in my opinion, until he actually does it is just an opinion and speculation and therefore does not go into the article. What do fortune tellers see in their crystal balls about the issue? Bmg916 Speak to Me 13:50, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

He used it again on the 2/27/2007 ECW episode.--Bedford 03:45, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Okay, and once he starts using it more consistently (which I have no doubt he will) we can add it to the article. Bmg916 Speak to Me 03:57, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

It should be referenced as Go 2 Sleep. Regardless of what Punk calls it, Go 2 Sleep is still the popular name, as well as the cited name under Professional Wrestling manouvers, for the move. If you want to be specific and call it as you see it rather than by popular name, then go and change the Vertebreaker references to 'reverse gory special piledriver' or 'back to back double underhook piledriver.' Its the same case scenario. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 202.69.219.22 (talk • contribs).

Please sign your comments with the four ~~~~, thanks!. Bmg916 Speak to Me 02:21, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

We call the move what the wrestler calls it. That's why on John Cena's page, we don't have the FU listed as a Fireman's Carry Slam (which is what it is). Call the move whatever Punk calls it. TJ Spyke 06:14, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

And since it hasn't been called anything, no name should be given yet. --Maestro25 07:18, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Money in the Bank qualifying match

Punk did not defeat Johnny Nitro to earn a spot in a specific match, he defeat Nitro to earn a spot in a specific match at a specific event. If you don’t like it, I suggest to go to Edge’s page a remove the part about him earning a spot in the Money in the Bank match at WrestleMania 23 (a future match). You might also want to go to The Undertaker’s page a remove the part where it says that by winning the Royal Rumble he earned a title shot at Wrestlemania 23 (also a future match).PepsiPlunge 03:13, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

I have. I hope others can watch for it too because I don't want to have to watch every single one of their articles for the next month. TJ Spyke 06:13, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
I'm also watching TJ, but hopefully we're not the only two, it's starting to become a real pain. Sometimes I've even given out vandal warnings to repeat offenders for blatantly ignoring the warnings. Bmg916 Speak to Me 19:24, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

I think it's silly that losses to Striker and Holly, though maybe the Holly loss is important since it was a WWE/ECW first for Punk, stay, while the Money In The Bank qualification doesn't. A spot in WrestleMania is a big achievement and worth mention. I added it but then removed it seeing as it seems like it would've been removed anyway. I'm all for not adding week-by-week play-by-play, but that qualifying win has long-term implications. 24.222.102.68 19:52, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Announced matches that have not yet occurred cannot be added into this article per WP:PW policy, this is why it cannot be added yet. After WrestleMania, however, it's inclusion is warranted. Bmg916 Speak to Me 20:17, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] CM Punk or Phil Brooks?

did we agree to move the page or was it vandalism? The Royal Blue 00:07, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

To CM Punk? It was agreed upon. Peace, 声援 -- The Hybrid 01:03, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

ok, just i could of sworn this was Phil Brooks but if it was agreed upon then cool The Royal Blue 21:46, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, Wikipedia has a policy stating that the popular name for a person should be used, and that was the thinking behind moving this article. Cheers, 声援 -- The Hybrid 22:01, 24 February 2007 (UTC)


who is it that is removing thing and acting like he/she ownes wikipedia. wikipedia is a public web site which allows the public to state their apinions. I think the "MITB: qulification should be added to CM Punks profile because its a big part of Punks younge career, so I will try to bypass this lock that someone put on this page and add it

It's not a single user its an agreed upon system of the wrestling wikiproject that applies to all wrestling articles. –– Lid(Talk) 23:31, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../c/m/_/Talk%7ECM_Punk_ef29.html"