Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Professional wrestling/Archive 13

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).
Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Archive 13

Contents

Need a page for WWE writers

Is there one?--Unopeneddoor 23:59, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

I created one. List of WWE writers. if anyone wants to edit it please do so.

1990s wrestling boom

This article has become a really good one. I think it should be listed amoung the good wrestling articles.

Article Help: Magnum Tokyo

I recently expanded on the Magnum Tokyo entry and re-formatted it to adhere to the guidelines provided in this project's main page. However, not having had much exposure to his Japanese work other than a handful of Dragon Gate matches, the best I could do was provide a summary of his work in WCW (which was very brief and only lasted a few months in 1998) and therefore I've left the disclaimer stating that the article was a stub. Since he hasn't seemed to be active in North America since '98, finding information about him through Google turned up very little, and the official Dragon Gate website unfortunately doesn't have an English version that I could find.. Is there anyone out there familiar enough with his work in Japan (in particular Dragon Gate) that could expand on what's already there? Additionally, if you have a picture to upload that you're certain would meet Wikipedia guidelines concerning copyright and fair usage, feel free to do so.--Deputy Marshall 14:04, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Try this website [[1]]. It should give you all the information you need. Stephen Day 21:52, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Delete Draven Cage?

I came across this page when removing several edits to numerous movelists relating to a Draven Cage. Near as I can tell the federation is real (http://members.lycos.co.uk/lwleague/news.html) but notability seems to be non-existant. I just want to double check here before putting it up for AfD. --- Lid 15:50, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Its very non-notable, and should be deleted. RobJ1981 17:06, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

NWA bylaws

Does anyone know where I can find an official copy (perferably recent) of the National Wrestling Alliance bylaws, rules, and regulations? I think that they would be a great addition to the wiki. - NickSentowski 17:14, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

I don't think they are publicly available. They aren't on the NWA's official website and a quick Google search didn't come up with anything. TJ Spyke 01:44, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
I even made a request to (unnamed) associate members of the NWA (of which I have worked for) and they're fabing me... The Liberary of Congress hasn't been of any help either. I'm going to keep looking, but so far, no good.- NickSentowski


THE NATIONAL WRESTLING ALLIANCE OFFICIAL RULES OF PROFESSIONAL WRESTLING

A BRIEF HISTORY OF WRESTLING

Wrestling is undoubtedly the oldest competitive sport known to man. Cave drawings indicate that it was one of the first forms of non-lethal athletic activity practiced by early European civilizations. Perhaps the earliest written account of wrestling is found in Genesis 32:24, when Jacob wrestled with an angel of the lord. Bible historians date this passage at about 1700 B.C. Excavations in Iraq revealed a bronze statuette of wrestlers, which archeologists have dated at 2600 B.C. Similar findings elsewhere in the Middle East are thought to be as much as 5000 years old. The ancient Greeks presumably learned the art and science of wrestling from the Egyptians, who depicted the sport with murals in the elaborate tombs of their pharaohs. Plato and Socrates, the renowned Greek philosophers, participated in wrestling. And of course, wrestling really came into its own as part of the Greek Olympics. Roman gladiators, who fought to he death for the amusement of decadent emperors and throngs of debauched spectators, included wrestling in their "games". Sumo wrestling appeared in Japan during the First Century B.C. In 828 A.D., Emperor Buntoku decreed that his two sons would wrestle to decide who would become heir to the throne. In his own time, King Henry VIII of England was as renowned for his wrestling skill as he has since become known for his treatment of estranged wives, and small wonder wrestling had come to be regarded as a skill worthy of knights, noblemen and even kings during the Middle Ages. A number of American Presidents, beginning with George Washington, were known as skilled wrestlers. Presidents Lincoln, Taft and Teddy Roosevelt were well respected for their skills in this ancient sport. In 1880, William Muldoon became the first American wrestling champion and later became known as the Father of American Wrestling. Muldoon became the first Chairman of the New York State Athletic Commission. Shortly after the turn of the century, a U.S. champion known as Frank Gotch defeated a European champion named George Hackenschmidt to become the first generally-recognized heavyweight wrestling champion of the world. Gotch held the title twice and retired undefeated in 1913. The National Wrestling Alliance is by far the largest and most respected governing body in professional wrestling today. It traces the line of its current heavyweight champion back to Frank Gotch, the sport's first world champion. The NWA and it's affiliated promoters have done a great deal to support and encourage the development of amateur wrestling in the United States and elsewhere in the world, and has likewise endeavored to maintain the highest possible standards of athletic competition in the professional ranks.


Section I: General Rules 1. Definition. A wrestling match shall consist of a physical confrontation between two athletes or teams of athletes who have demonstrated a proficiency in the skills contiguous to the sports, and are in sound physical condition. Wrestlers shall be of good moral character and shall not be fugitives from justice. (a) A wrestling match shall be held in a "ring" constructed in accordance with specific NWA standards, as available upon request to any persons having been approved for the promotion of NWA-sanctioned wrestling events. (b) The object of a wrestling match shall be to gain a victory over one's opponent through the use of a legal hold or series of legal holds and maneuvers, either by scoring a pin fall or by forcing an opponent to concede defeat. To be pinned, both of a contestant's shoulders must be held to the mat for three consecutive seconds, as witnessed and counted off by a referee in charge of the event.

2. Legal holds. Holds and maneuvers which are allowed in AAU, NCAA, and Olympic wrestling competition shall be permitted in professional matches. Additional holds which are not permitted in amateur competition, but which involve the use of hands, arms, feet, and legs in grasping or manipulating an opponent in such a way as to gain a position of advantage in a manner consistent with the basic objectives of the sport as outlined herein, shall be permitted, provided they are not specifically excluded herein or by subsequent NWA directive.

3. Holds and conduct not allowed. Certain holds and types of behavior which are inherently unsportsmanlike or for other reasons not in the best interests of professional wrestling will not be allowed. Wrestlers failing to adhere to these restrictions will be subject to disqualification and/or subsequent disciplinary action. (a) The use of a closed fist is not permitted. A referee is authorized to disqualify a wrestler for the use of a closed fist after appropriate warnings. (b) Kicking with the point of the toe or heel is not permitted. Kicking with the flat of the foot or the instep is allowed. © The use of karate or kung-fu thrusts or kicks is prohibited. Certain non-lethal judo moves, which may resemble these prohibited maneuvers, are allowed. Referees are expected to exercise extreme care in differentiating between legal and non-legal martial arts tactics. (d) Pulling of hair, mask, tights, or athletic gear of any sort to gain an advantage is prohibited. (e) Eye-gouging or other efforts which would tend to impair an opponent's vision will not be allowed. (f) Biting any part of an opponent's anatomy is strictly prohibited. (g) Bending an opponent's individual fingers in such a way as to bring about a possible fracture or sprain is not allowed. (h) Choke holds are prohibited, as is any use of the ring ropes for the purpose of impairing an opponent's breathing. (i) Any wrestler who deliberately strikes his opponent in the privates is subject to immediate disqualification. (j) Taping of knuckles, wrists or any part of the hand, except as certified to be necessary by a physician, is prohibited. (k) Any wrestler using a non-regulation object as a weapon against his opponent is subject to immediate disqualification. (l) Any abuse, physical or verbal, of an official shall be grounds for disqualification and possible fine or suspension. (m) Any interference in a match on the part of an individual who is not a designated participant shall be grounds for the disqualification of the contestant(s) who, in the referee's judgment, was being aided by said interference. This stipulation shall apply to managers and seconds, as well as to any other parties who illegally involve themselves in a wrestling match. (n) Attacking an opponent before the opening bell, after the final bell, or between falls, will be grounds for disciplinary action at the discretion of the referee or reviewing officials. (o) Deliberately throwing an opponent over the top ring rope is grounds for immediate disqualification. The exception to this is the battle royal. Battle royals may be held only with specific NWA authorization. (p) The use of any hold or maneuver not specified herein, but which in the judgment of the NWA President and/or Board of Directors is especially dangerous to participants in NWA-sanctioned wrestling events may, at any time, be prohibited by a directive from NWA headquarters.

4. Additional standards of conduct. Unless otherwise stated herein, a referee will disqualify a wrestler when an infraction for which said wrestler has been warned twice shall be committed for a third time; however, a referee shall have the discretion to disqualify a participant at any time said referee feels that a deliberate infraction of the rules would otherwise alter the outcome of a match in favor of the wrestler committing the infraction. (a) A hold shall not be allowed if either contestant is in physical contact with the ropes or if any part of either contestant's body is outside the vertical plane of the ring ropes. The referee will instruct the wrestler applying the hold in such cases to desist, and the wrestler applying the hold will have five seconds as counted off by the referee in which to comply. (b) In the event that a wrestler is thrown outside the ring, he shall have ten seconds as counted off by the referee in which to re-enter the ring. The count shall continue only while the remaining contestant is in a neutral corner, making no effort to impede his opponent's return to the ring. If the referee's count is interrupted at any point, it shall be resumed at its beginning, not at the point of interruption, and only after order has been restored. © The above ten-count procedure shall likewise apply in the case of a wrestler who is in or approximately in a prone position on the canvas without being in physical contact with his opponent and who, in the judgment of the referee, is temporarily unable to wrestle. (d) Any wrestler taking a full ten-count in the above circumstances shall be declared the loser of the match.

5. Tag team matches. Wrestlers wishing to participate in tag team matches may do so in accordance with the customary contractual procedures. (a) In the event one member of a tag team is unable to wrestle or fails to make an appearance, his partner has the option of finding a substitute, forfeiting the match, or facing two opponents by himself. (b) Only one member of a tag team is to be in the ring at any given time while the match is in progress. A five second transition period is permitted to facilitate wrestlers on a team exchanging places in the ring. © Wrestlers on the same team can exchange places in the ring only after a legal tag-out has been accomplished. This must consist of a wrestler inside the perimeter of the ring ropes using one of his hands to make physical contact with one of the hands of his partner outside the perimeter of the ring ropes, who shall be in a standing position, within arm's length of his own corner, with both feet on the mat and one arm over the tope rope. A tag-out shall not be allowed if the wrestler on the outside of the ring is not appropriately positioned. (d) The referee may, at his discretion, disallow any tag-out which he does not see or which he has reason to believe did not occur in accordance with the above stipulations. (e) Tag teams may consist of two, three, or more men within a reasonable number, and provided their opposing teams have an equal number of participants, except in the case of "handicap" matches, wherein the numerically disadvantaged team or individual must sign an appropriate waiver of indemnity. A similar waiver must be signed in the case of "Texas tornado" matches, in which tag team procedures are in part suspended, and in "elimination" matches, in which the makeup of teams may not remain constant throughout the match. (f) Unless otherwise contractually stipulated, a tag team event may be won (or a fall therein may be won) by defeating only one member of the opposing team.

6. Weight divisions. Wrestlers shall be matched with as little discrepancy in relative weights as is feasible, however wrestlers wishing to compete in the unlimited or heavyweight division are expected to accept matches with opponents of any weight. (a) The weight limit for the junior heavyweight division shall be 230 pounds. (b) Other weight divisions, where applicable, shall be designated in accordance with the rules of Olympic freestyle competition.

7. Women's matches. Women athletes participating in NWA-sanctioned wrestling events will be subject to the same rules and regulations as male wrestlers except as stipulated herein. (a) Women wrestlers shall in no case be paid either more or less than male athletes involved in matches which could reasonably be construed as being of similar value to the promoter. (b) Women wrestler will not be matched against male opponents. "Mixed" tag team matches will be conducted in such a manner that female participants are not required to wrestle directly against male opponents.

8. Non-sanctioned events. The National Wrestling Alliance does not sanction cage matches, chain matches, bullrope matches, strap matches, "lights out" matches, taped fist matches, Texas or other designated "death" matches, or any other events in which the rules and regulations designated herein are not fully enforced. Wrestlers participating in non-sanctioned events do so without recourse to the NWA in the event of an injury.


Section II: Promoters & Officials

1. Qualifications for promoters. Persons authorized to promote NWA-sanctioned wrestling events must be responsible citizens of the nation in which they do business, or non-resident businesspersons who are in compliance with the standards set forth for doing business by local authorities. They must be persons of good reputation and good moral character, and shall not be fugitives from justice. (a) The above standards shall likewise apply to the officers of partnerships and corporations promoting NWA-sanctioned wrestling. (b) Any and all records and papers, financial, contractual or otherwise, relevant to the promotion of NWA-sanctioned wrestling events, shall be subject to inspection by any properly-designated officer of the NWA. Said officers will not release the information contained therein to the press or to the public except in the case of significant irregularity as determined by review of the NWA Board of Directors. © Promoters shall assume responsibility for obtaining the services of qualified wrestlers and officials, and for securing buildings or outdoor arenas adequate for the purpose of holding wrestling events. (d)It shall be the promoter's responsibility to ensure that the following are provided: dressing rooms, showers, locker and toilet facilities. At least two dressing rooms shall be available at each event. If both men and women wrestlers are on hand, separate facilities for opponents of both sexes shall be available. Unauthorized persons are not permitted in the dressing room areas. (e) Promoters shall be responsible for obtaining a regulation wrestling ring and personnel to ensure proper set-up and tear-down. (f) Promoters will secure adequate liability insurance with a reputable firm for all wrestling events under NWA sanction. (g) Promoters may, if they choose, to initiate contracts with individual wrestlers or managers, or this function may be delegated to a matchmaker. In the latter case said matchmaker shall likewise be a person of good reputation, good moral character, and shall not be a fugitive from justice. (h) Promoters shall be responsible for publicizing wrestling events in a tasteful manner, and for avoiding any false or misleading advertising. (i) Promoters are responsible for paying wrestlers, officials and other personnel involved in wrestling events in accordance with existing contracts or verbal agreements. (j) Promoters will report any misbehavior on the part of athletes or other significant irregularities in writing to NWA headquarters within five working days of any such incident. Promoters are advised to make preliminary telephone reports in cases wherein prompt official action would be advisable.

2. Qualifications for referees. Referees shall be persons who are thoroughly familiar with the rules and regulations pertaining to professional wrestling, and competent to see that these rules and regulations are properly enforced. Referees shall be persons of good moral character and shall not be fugitives from justice. (a) Referees shall be approved by an official of the NWA before being authorized to officiate at any NWA-sanctioned wrestling event. (b) The referee shall be in complete charge of any wrestling match to which he is assigned. He may disqualify an individual wrestler or team for infractions of the rules as outlined herein. He may, at his discretion, stop a match to prevent serious injury to a participant. © Prior to each match, the referee shall determine that the contestants are not concealing any unauthorized gear ("foreign objects") and that they do no have their bodies coated with excessive oil or grease which would make it unduly difficult for an opponent to maintain a legal hold. Referees conduction pre-bout checks of wrestlers of the opposite sex are cautioned to use proper discretion in their attempts to locate possible concealed objects.

3. Qualifications for timekeepers. Timekeepers shall be persons who are familiar with the rules and regulations of professional wrestling as applicable to this specialized function. Timekeepers shall be persons of good moral character and shall not be fugitives from justice. (a) Timekeepers shall be approved by an officer of the NWA before being assigned to any NWA-sanctioned event. (b) The timekeeper assigned to an NWA-sanctioned wrestling event shall be in possession of an accurate timepiece, which he shall use to determine the assigned duration of each individual match. © The timekeeper shall signal the beginning of a match or fall by ringing a bell at the referee's instruction or at the end of a designated rest period. The timekeeper shall likewise signal the end of a fall of a match when so instructed by the referee, or when the designated time limit has elapsed. (d) The timekeeper assigned to a match shall keep the referee and contestants apprised of elapsed time and/or time remaining at regular intervals, or when requested by the referee.

4. Vested interests. No official shall have any vested interest in the outcome of a match to which he is assigned.


Section III: Championships

1. Definition. A championship confers upon an individual wrestler or team of wrestlers official recognition that this individual or team has been established through officially-sanctioned competition as being the best in whatever category, weight division or geographical area is designated by the championship in question.

2. Specific championships recognized by the NWA. The National Wrestling Alliance recognizes a number of international, national, regional, state and local championships. The following is a partial list of these. (a) The world heavyweight championship. This is recognized throughout NWA jurisdiction and elsewhere as the apogee of achievement in the unlimited or heavyweight division. (b) The world junior heavyweight championship. This is recognized throughout NWA jurisdiction and elsewhere as the apogee of achievement among wrestlers able to compete within a 230 pound weight limit. © World championships may also be recognized by the NWA for other weight divisions at such time as sufficient activity in these weight divisions merits recognition of a world champion. (d) National championships for nations under NWA jurisdiction. (e) Regional, state and local championships, provincial championships, and other such championships as may pertain to reasonable geographic divisions of broader areas under NWA jurisdiction.

3. Championships not recognized. The NWA does not recognize "brass knuckles" championships or any other championships based on competition which does not comply with the rules and regulations of the National Wrestling Alliance as outlined herein.

4. Rankings. The National Wrestling Alliance may, at designated intervals, publish official rankings of contenders for any recognized championship, upon concurrence of two-thirds of the members of the NWA Board of Directors at any regularly-scheduled meeting at which a valid quorum is present.

5. Additional rules pertaining to championships. The following stipulations apply to the recognition and transfer of championships by the National Wrestling Alliance except in cases wherein exceptions are specified in valid contracts acceptable to the NWA. (a) Trophies or belts may be awarded in recognition of championships, but these do not in themselves constitute such recognition except as won or lost in compliance with the rules of wrestling as set forth herein. (b) Championships cannot change hands in the event of a draw or if a challenger wins only one fall (even though it is the only fall scored) in a 2 out of 3 fall match. © Championships cannot change hands on a disqualification ruling unless so stipulated in the contract. (d) Championships shall be defended at least once every thirty days unless the NWA authorizes an exception for good cause. (e) When a championship vacancy occurs, the NWA may designate a new champion on the basis of meritorious qualifications, order a match to determine a new champion, or order a tournament to determine a new champion.


Section IV: Additional Standards of Conduct

1. Gambling. Absolutely no gambling on the outcome of wrestling matches on the part of wrestlers, promoters, managers, seconds, officials or arena employees is permitted, either at the arena or at outside locations. (a) Promoters are expected to take reasonable measures to discourage patrons from gambling on the outcome of matches while attending wrestling events. (b) The above shall not be construed as being applicable to gambling at licensed tracks and casinos, or to private wagering except upon NWA-sanctioned wrestling events.

2. Bribes. The acceptance of bribes in exchange for unethical practices on the part of wrestlers, officials or other persons subject to these regulations, is strictly prohibited. (a) Wrestlers accepting bribes in exchange for "throwing" matches shall be subject to find and/or fines not to exceed $10,000, suspension for one year, or both, for the first offense, except in the case of championship matches.* (b) Officials accepting bribes in exchange for favoring one contestant over another in matches to which they are assigned are subject to revocation of status and/or other disciplinary action as deemed appropriate by the NWA Review Board. © Failure of above designated persons promptly to report a bribe offer to an officer of the NWA shall be construed as complicity in the offense, whether or not the bribe is accepted.

  • Cases involving any such irregularities in championship matches will be heard by a duly appointed panel of NWA officials, who will be charged with taking appropriate action.


Hope that helps, Rob Brazier (robbrazier123@gmail.com)

PPV Listings on RAW & SD! Page

I reverted these edits since it just relist info from List of WWE pay-per-view events. BionicWilliam 03:32, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Torrie Wilson Full Name Dispute

I can you help settle a dispute? My Source for here name being Torrie Anne Gruner {née Wilson) is [2] The Anon has produce no source and trying to pass them self as Mrs. Gruner herself. BionicWilliam 03:32, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Dave Finlay and CM Punk

On Dave Finlay there is a user, User:Mikedk9109, who keeps changing Finlay's finisher from Air Raid Crash to Kryptonite Krunch. His argument is that it's under the KK banner and that the ARC name is applied incorrectly as part of the paragraph states the name ARC is used incorrectly when referring to a KK. The problem is Finlay DOES perform an ARC as it goes across the back from one shoulder to opposte arm instead of straight down to the same arm. I've tried to explain this repeatedly but he keeps reverting me, even when I list examples of other articles that link to KK as ARC because they aren't KK, they're ARC's.

The CM Punk page has recently suffered a similar problem with users changing the Anaconda Vice name to variations of "Guillotine Choke/Key Lock Combo" which is the name listed on the WWE.com website, which is an unbelievable non-reliable website for move names but as of right now no one has changed it to that again and Anaconda Vice is the name he's used for the last 3 years.

Just bringing these to peoples attention and hoping for some aid. --- Lid 09:51, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Aaron "The Idol" Stevens

His page name needs changing, as that name was his OVW ring name, but not his current SD! name. Not sure what to though. His real name appears to be Aaron Haddad, but I'm not 100% sure on that. His current SD! name, as you will see tonight, is Idol Stevens. We could also change it back to Aaron Stevens (wrestler). Thoughts? --James Duggan 21:30, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

I think until Aaron Haddad can be veravide it should be at Aaron Stevens (Wrester) BionicWilliam 22:39, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Everywhere I've looked (included the page cited in the Wikipedia article) says his real name is Aaron Stevens. What's the source for Aaron Haddad being his real name? --Deputy Marshall 23:02, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Aaron Haddad pulls up no exact matches to the wrestler except this Wikipedia article. First I suggest moving the article back to Aaron Stevens (wrestler) considering he doesn't have nearly enough popularity to have a name change like that. Next, change his name back to Aaron Stevens because of every other verified source. 216.78.95.111 23:09, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

I know the IMDb article for Beth Phoenix says his real name is Aaron Haddad, but that's the only place I've seen it. I'm not the one that put that as his real name anyway, someone else did. --James Duggan 00:24, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

I've moved it back to Aaron Stevens (wrestler) since that's what everyone here seems to agree with. --James Duggan 00:34, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Unsanctioned move/copy paste

A new user, User:WWEFan1337, has "moved" List of professional wrestling throws to Professional wrestling throws. I say "moved" because the history shows it's not a move but rather a copy paste of the information thus losing the history. If you will recall I posted a topic a while back on this due to that nearly all pages link to Professional wrestling throws rather than List of and asked if we should move the page. If I remember correctly at the time we reached no consensus so my question right now is do we move the page back or do we get an admin to move the history of List of to Professional? --- Lid 19:08, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

I've reversed it, you don't need an admin for that, it's basically reverting. Someone might want to leave a message for that user about proper policy. --James Duggan 21:33, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
I was referring to an admin on the query of even though what he did was against policy by bypassing the project, my question was a rehash of the previous topic: Should it be moved to fall in line with the other pages? --- Lid 22:26, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
This page should help explain. --James Duggan 22:31, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
Lists is listed by definition of largely consisting of links to other pages, while this pages are rather closer to mini-articles and definitions. --- Lid 22:34, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
Your right, it should be at Professional wrestling throws, for consistency with the pages Professional wrestling holds, Professional wrestling attacks, Professional wrestling aerial techniques, and Professional wrestling double-team maneuvers. --James Duggan 22:24, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
Should we set up a vote here to decide? --- Lid 23:04, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Stay on Wikipedia or create our own Wiki?

There are many people on Wikipedia who aren't wrestling fans and have been deleting wrestling articles because there aren't enough wrestling fans to outvote them. If you want proof, read the comments on McMahonism's deletion page from non-fans and look at what they did to WWE Development Wrestler Victoria Crawford's page. While I agree McMahonism was unworthy of an article, the fact is that there are people on Wikipedia who vote for wrestling articles to be deleted solely because "wrestling is fake." I think we'd be able to create a better Wrestling Encyclopedia by forking this Wikiproject into a Wiki. I personally have a web hosting account with enough bandwidth for the time being and could set it up. Since we'd make the policies of the Wiki, not other people, we'd be able to do alot more with the articles. There's people here on Wikipedia who believe that a wrestler has to be a big name before he/she warrants an article. I feel there are too many people on Wikipedia that are not wrestling fans but are marking wrestler articles up for deletion. Recently, the wrestling business sim Extreme Warfare, which is very popular and well-known among most of the online wrestling fans, has been targeted for deletion. While every attempt to get that article deleted failed, people keep trying. I am concerned about this problem and we either need to vote in a policy to prevent this from continuing, vote down all the attempts, or fork off from Wikipedia. I'm for forking off of Wikipedia because I think we won't be able to make a decent guide to wrestling on Wikipedia because of the anti-Wrestling people. Could you imagine what would happen if somebody attempted to delete a Pro Football player article? That wouldn't happen to the same extent with wrestling because we're almost always too busy or just too few in number to keep wrestling articles on Wikipedia. 205.166.61.142 13:16, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Lots of non-notable footballer players don't have articles, also there have been previous attempts for wrestling wikis but none have survived as long or have been as comprehensive as the WikiProject on Wikipedia. --- Lid 13:56, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
I believe someone created a Wrestlepedia a while back. I personally think there's way too many articles on professional wrestlers and aspects of professional wrestling and some of the articles (particularly WWE-related ones) ones get really cluttered and mired in kayfabe. A major professional wrestling wiki would be good, something like Wookiepedia or Memory Alpha, but for all the details and minutiae of pro wrestling. Remember, Wikipedia is a general interest encyclopedia, so pro wrestling articles here should be of general interest or at least be accessible to people who aren't into pro wrestling as well. --Jtalledo (talk) 19:26, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

I left the original unregistered comment that started this section earlier. I'll set up a Wrestling Wiki and post a link here later for those reading this discussion. I don't really have the Wiki Code knowledge to do most of the stuff people do. For example, I'm certain I won't be able to emulate the infoboxes myself. If there is significant editing to get it going, maybe it can become a successful more in-depth Wrestling Wiki. I personally would love to be able to read years worth of kayfabe events on a Wiki. The current results websites require alot of time to navigate through their result archives. I think anybody who's attempted it on some of the sites would agree. Either you can get match results only or you can make about 20 clicks or more just to see how a storyline played out. I agree that weekly references to kayfabe aren't of general interest, but there are fans who probably could use the information. After all, this WikiProject is used at times in the Extreme Warfare community to get information about wrestling. It leaves alot to be desired though, causing low quality data to be released for those games, particularly in the earlier periods. You can't find any scenarios prior to 1983 for any of that series because there isn't sufficient information easily available. I do think the Source citation is important here on Wikipedia, but it does hinder the effort to build deep articles and could be de-emphasized on a Wrestling Wiki. Brad Blaze 03:52, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

I think someone made a wrestling wiki, I just forget the name of it. --James Duggan 04:57, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Found one here, but that's not the one I'm thinking of. --James Duggan 05:00, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
Found it here. --James Duggan 05:02, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
I started mine long ago. http://www.wrestlepedia.org Add whatever you like. I have no limits at this time... Wikipedia Rules apply to everyting. - NickSentowski 19:48, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

King Booker's Court

Should we merge the article on King Booker's Court into Booker Huffman? It looks like their alliance was loose at best and since Regal and Finlay seem to have parted ways, it doesn't look like they will ever be a full time stable. --Jtalledo (talk) 19:31, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

  • I think it should be merged with Booker T's page. The stable was short lived, and it's very doubtful they will reunite. RobJ1981 22:43, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

I agree it should be merged into the regular page for Booker. The Court failed to last much longer than the Lashley feud and that was ages ago by this point. Brad Blaze 03:53, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

TNA Xplosion

The page has a list of all the results ever (from the looks of it). It looks sloppy and in my opinion, not needed. I can understand a list of highlights or something of that sort, but not a whole list. What does everyone else think? RobJ1981 04:28, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Jamie Noble

User:Tim Long is convinced that IMDb listing him as "Jamie Howard" makes it absolute gospel that that's his birth name, when several different sources vary between Howard and Gibson, with most actually favoring Gibson. Just a heads-up. Tromboneguy0186 06:53, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Unfortunately for him, his IMDb bio page says his birth name is James Gibson. Anyway, I left a note for him on his talk page about it. --James Duggan 07:22, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
His name is James Gibson. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by K09 (talk • contribs).

PWI type Awards

I'm kinda confused. Where are we supposed to place awards like PWI and RSPW awards? Some articles have them in the same section as championships and others have them in their own section. - Bdve 15:44, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

RSPW awards should not be mentioned in articles, as they are non-notable and fairly irrelevant. McPhail 18:11, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
RSPW? I don't think most people know what that is, I had to look it up myself. Most wrestling fans know who PWI are though, and they should be listed in the "Championships and Accomplishments" section of a wrestler. TJ Spyke 20:57, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
RSPW is probably of narrow interest, so their awards should probably not be included. --Jtalledo (talk) 23:54, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
It was just an example. Though I never would have guessed RSPW is non notable. I think I just came up in the Smarks era too much. - Bdve 23:58, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
Yeah, at least PWI is published. --Jtalledo (talk) 00:07, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
RSPW falls under internet awards, which are never notable and shouldn't be added. PWI and WON are pretty much the only ones that get a pass due to their status in the industry and wrestling as a whole. --- Lid 00:48, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
Agreed on that point. The problem is that even though RSPW was a big thing in the smark community in the early days of the internet, it was just the opinion of a relatively small number of people (in comparison to other awards) who were part of Rec.Sport.Pro-Wrestling and was never anything near as legitimate (or taken as seriously by people) as the PWI or WON awards. Although, to play Devil's Advocate, the PWI Awards in the past have come under a ton of scrutiny for going to guys friendly to Bill Apter - I've read on more than one occassion accounts of wrestlers who had pictures taken for awards they received before the "fan ballot" even went out. Don't know if that type of problem still exists - regardless, though, it was a popular publication and did actually mean something to the average fan. Deputy Marshall 16:06, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
I have problems with both PWI and WON to be honest. The only problem with PWI is when things like Zach Gowen winning Rookie of the Year somehow. WON has to do with Meltzer, his 5 star ratings systems is complete BS and I consider it a complete joke. Also, giving Triple H the most overrated award 3 times in the last 5 years? I know he has a bias towards Japanese wrestling(evident by his list of 5 star matches and the fact that he rarely says anything good about WWE), but that is ridiculous.
The WON awards are voted upon by a panel of members of the wrestling community and subscribers. It's not Meltzer alone and attacking him for the ways the votes resulted in is illogical. --- Lid 10:45, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Article Cleanup & Focus

I am once again seeing a tendency in articles to cover kayfabed storylines & angles in minute detail, causing many of the individual wrestler biographies to swell in size and become unencyclopedic messes. At this juncture, I would propose that most of these biographies be scaled back considerably in scope, and that links to wrestler profiles on obsessedwithwrestling.com be provided as external links for people actually interested in such material. - Chadbryant 10:42, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

It sounds like a reasonable proposition. Alternatives include moving some of the content to a dedicated professional wrestling wiki as was discussed earlier. I don't think scaling back content would go over very well with some users though and it would require considerable legwork to keep articles trim. --Jtalledo (talk) 12:17, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
As I see it, much of the blame for the unencylopedic nature and size of wrestler biographies here lies with unregistered or inexperienced editors who treat the articles as if they were/are a part of a wrestling message board or blog. Scaling back and keeping control of articles after they have been cleaned up would probably be an ambitious undertaking for one editor, but making it a group effort would certainly not be a problem. - Chadbryant 12:34, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
If there's consensus to do this, a good place to start would be making a list of articles that are too long. Checking out which articles are in Category: Frequent Kayfabe targets on Wikipedia would be a good idea too. --Jtalledo (talk) 12:41, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
Lol, believe me i know i went through a phase where all i did was take a range of pro wrestling articles and performed the harsh trimming (see War on week-by-week). They have stayed pretty well trimmed (except for the few ppl that decided to revert the trim edits) but the main problem comes with weekly posts after about a month these editors rearly are concerned with the information so sections refering to past events stay pretty well trimmed --- Paulley
I still think that most of the current ones are way too long - when professional wrestler articles have more detail than articles on world leaders, something's wrong. --Jtalledo (talk) 09:49, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
Simply removing the week-by-week synopsis of WWE storylines and other kayfabe material whittled Kurt Angle from 41k to under 30k. I am positive that there are numerous other wrestling biographies that could benefit from this treatment. - Chadbryant 10:33, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

1990s wrestling boom

In reference to the entry on the 1990s wrestling boom which was on the agenda for articles to be created, I've been working on the edit on and off for a couple days now after what it was before (wrought with spelling/grammatical errors and pretty short). Let me know what you guys think, and if there's anything else that should be on there (or shouldn't be on there). --Deputy Marshall 15:55, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Needs more ECW. They can easily be added around the "Attitude era" section considering how much of Attitude was ECW-centric. Other than that, looks good. Bdve 18:36, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

I looks fine, but really I don't think Wrestlemania X7 was the end of the Attitude Era, Wrestlemania X8 was. I can name 10 good reasons why also. Just let me know if you want me to list them. Trust me, these are extremely good reasons too. You can't say just because of the buyout and a heel turn the era ended. The Attitude Era was way more than just that. LC6 12:17 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Where does it say the Attitude Era ended with Wrestlemania X7? And what heel turn are you referring to? And the buyout was a major contributor to the end of the Wrestling Boom. I think you're confusing the singular "Attitude Era" in the WWF/WWE with the 90s Wrestling Boom in general. Deputy Marshall 21:14, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
Couldn't one argue that the "Attitude Era" ended when they changed from WWF to WWE? Isn't that when they changed logos to get rid of the "Attitude" that was in the logo? And I agree it's not the same as the "Wrestling Boom". -- Davetron5000 21:24, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
If thats the case then the Attitude Era ended exactly at Backlash 2002 not WrestleMania X8 -- 3:16 21:41, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Shouldn't this article be apart of the History of professional wrestling article. Plus I really belive that the History of professional wrestling article should be reviewed for not notable changes. BionicWilliam 21:49, 10 August 2006 (UTC) BionicWilliam 21:49, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

BionicWilliam, I edited your links to the article. I agree that between that, the "Boom" article and the Monday Night Wars article there is a lot of duplication. I think the best would be to trim the info out of History of professional wrestling and merge it with the "Boom" article and have it referenced from the history article. This will keep the history one from getting to be too big and hopefully cut down on some duplication. -- Davetron5000 21:56, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

WWE Brand Extension Wikipedia:NPOV dispute

The Criticisms of the Brand Extension section needed to be revised or removed, since it's is not NPOV, plus their no source to this section. Most of it is Opinon. BionicWilliam 23:55, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

It's also inaccurate. There were NEVER plans for WCW to take over RAW's timeslot, I remember that the plan was to give them the Saturday night timeslot(which was WWF Excess at the time). TJ Spyke 03:29, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

DDT (professional wrestling)#Argentine DDT and Facebuster#Argentine facebuster; Brainbuster#Argentine brainbuster and Professional wrestling throws#Inverted Death Valley driver

Am I mistaken or are these sets of moves the same moves with different names? DDT and facebuster seem the same and brainbuster and IDVD seem the same. --- Lid 03:15, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

DDT and facebuster are different moves. In DDT the opponent is dropped forward, with his legs pointing at the same direction as the wrestler applying the move, in facebuster the wrestler drops the opponent facing his side. In DDT the opponent is also usually dropped in a higher (bent) angle, while in facebuster the opponent falls flat on his chest. Argentine brainbuster is crap that should be removed, it's not even a brainbuster.
↪Lakes (Talk) 05:59, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

British PPV's

Can somebody in the UK(or someone familiar with it) tell me if Sky Movies + and Sky Sports are PPV channels over there? This has to do with WWF/E. I was under the impression that the first UK only PPV was One Night Only in 1997. TJ Spyke 05:06, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Well, You have to pay extra to subscribe to sports/movies, plus you have to have a sky subscription, however you don't have to pay extra for the PPV's as with sky box office. Advantages being the big four, Vengeance, J-Day, Armaggeddon are the only ones we have to pay for. God Bless Great Britain! Kingfisherswift 11:23, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

The first UK exclusive pay-per-view event was One Night Only in 1997 and was shown on Sky Box Office, BSkyB's pay-per-view service. Prior to that, there were UK events (see here) but were shown on Sky One, Sky Movies, and Sky Sports, which are all not pay-per-view channels. In fact, I should really correct the WWE pay-per-view page and note them as supercards rather than pay-per-view events. --Oakster (Talk) 16:56, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

I thought so. Thanks guys. TJ Spyke 20:20, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Wrestling article editing

Hi, been on Wikipedia for a while now and edit a few stuff but haven't really touched the wrestling articles. I like how they are set up but feel that there should really be a distinction between "real world" and "kayfabe" events. A lot of the wrestling articles do not make that distinction at all, making it look rather a mess. For example most wrestling articles mention how the wrestlers got into wrestling, then proceed to describe all storylines they were involved in as if it was real. I noticed that Jackie Gayda has a "kayfabe" notice like this:

Template:Kayfabe disclaimer

Maybe this should be applied to ALL of the wrestling bio articles?

Good work though, love reading it all, especially as I completely missed the peak of the "Attitude" and "Monday Night Wars" era Smoothy 13:23, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

I think what would be better would be if the bios are written in such a way to make clear what is kayfabe and what isn't, or even a kayfabe start/end thing like what is done with spoilers. --Davetron5000 13:54, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
I don't really like the tag - it just excuses sub-par writing for articles. If an article is well-written (as these articles should be), it should make the distinction between reality and storylines without need for this tag. --Jtalledo (talk) 09:46, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
I've been trying my best to find articles with the tag and re-write them noting the differences between Kayfabe and real life when needed. - Bdve 14:56, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

ROH title unification

Is it definite that the pure title is now a thing of the past? Are we sure that Danielson isn't going to just hold both and defend them separately? Tromboneguy0186 21:22, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

I'm not entirely sure. Ring of Honor hasn't made it all that clear (yet), and I haven't read anything to suggest that the Pure Title has been completely absorbed into the World Title (other than speculation of course). I imagine within the week we should know. Deputy Marshall 02:22, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
All the reports on the ROH website say the titles have been unified, but I don't think that's enough unless ROH says so. I just hope if it is a real unification and not a fake one like in boxing(where they are still seperate titles but just held by the same person). TJ Spyke 04:13, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Drew Hankinson

There's an anon. user who keeps changing his height to 6'9", even though all sources provided say 6'7". I was wondering if I could have some help dealing with him. --James Duggan 23:40, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Move vote for List of professional wrestling throws

As per Unsanctioned move/copy paste a move vote has been initiated by myself on List of professional wrestling throws to Professional wrestling throws at Talk:List of professional wrestling throws. Your votes and opinions would be appreciated. --- Lid 00:16, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

I read WP:LIST and that page doesn't really fit the description of a list page since each item has a description with it. No other list page I've seen does that, they just list the items, usually items with a page of their own, which the items on this page don't have, if that makes any sense. --James Duggan 00:32, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
Sorry I should've noted this was just a notice of the move. Actual votes for the move go at Talk:List of professional wrestling throws#Requested move --- Lid 00:48, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
Oh, I realize that, I just wanted to provide some info on how Wikipedia defines lists. It wasn't a vote. --James Duggan 01:01, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

List of TNA X Division Champions by age

This article is up for deletion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of TNA X Division Champions by age. I personally think the article should stay and think the people voting against it are not wrestling fans and that's why they are voting to delete. I voted to keep it, but I am the only one so far. TJ Spyke 21:01, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

I see myself disagreeing there, other pages do have a by age listing and but I think they should be removed as well as only the oldest and youngest ones really matter and they can be incorporated into the article. --- Lid 21:09, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Age lists are useless trivia. Wikipedia shouldn't have any of them. RobJ1981 04:40, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
I have to agree with the previous two replies. I fail to see why such a list would be necessary at all. Deputy Marshall 04:45, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
I also agree. There's no need for something like that. Normy132 07:55, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Professional wrestling worldwide

Hey everyone. Is there any interest in getting pages started up for professional wrestling in the United States and professional wrestling in Canada similar to professional wrestling in Australia and professional wrestling in the United Kingdom? Normy132 08:17, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

ROH World Heavyweight Championship

Lately, there have been quite a few anons removing the word "heavyweight" from the title's page, the defenses page, and Bryan Danielson's page. I left comment tags at the top of all three asking them not to do this, since [3] states that "ROH World Heavyweight Championship" is the correct name of the belt. I also left a pretty detailed explanation on Talk: ROH World Heavyweight Championship. I doubt it'll stop, so be aware. Tromboneguy0186 23:58, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Randy Baer/RD Reynolds page

Someone created an article about Randy Baer, also known as RD Reynolds, the creator of wrestlecrap.com. I'm not questioning whether he deserves an article (although I'd lean toward not, it would be a lost cause to try anyway), but most of the article is about his various exploits in small indy feds. It comes off as vanity and self-promotion and (especially the intro) it isn't really written in a NPOV. In fact, I think maybe RD wrote it himself, considering the user name of who is editing is similar to captain crunch, the cereal, which RD claims to be a fan of according to his radio show. What should we do about this article? It needs some kind of tweaking, the indy feds he is in are barely above backyard feds. Burgwerworldz 00:56, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

  • I don't think he deserves an article. It should just be deleted. RobJ1981 01:03, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
I'm not sure, he may deserve an article under being a published author. --- Lid 01:35, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
That's just it, if you put his article up for deletion, it would probably not work since he "technically" co-wrote 2 books. I don't think he should have an article either, personally. If he didn't have a book published, it would be speedied. But still, the content is a little bothersome, it borders on violating WP:VAIN and just talks about his time in a few minor indy feds. Any help would be appreciated. Burgwerworldz 02:35, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

A wave of new wrestler articles

  • Recently while checking the new pages, several pages for NCW Northern Championship Wrestling (Canada promotion) wrestlers have popped up. In my opinion they aren't very notable. The NCW page shouldn't even exist, if you ask me. Granted NCW has been around a while, that doesn't mean alot. Lots of indy feds exist for a while, that certainly doesn't make them notable. I'm not saying Wikipedia should just be for the most known promotions... all I'm saying is there really doesn't need to be a page for each and every wrestler for some Canada promotion that doesn't appear to be that notable. RobJ1981 01:33, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
I suggest nominating most of them for deletion. They don't really seem notable, even the organization seems to not be very notable. TJ Spyke 02:38, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
You might also want to check List of independent circuit, non-affiliated or retired wrestlers for any non-notable additions. --James Duggan 02:49, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
  • I checked that page, and it's in serious need of better sorting. Just sorted as male and female wrestlers doesn't seem to help alot. I posted on the talk page (which is pretty inactive), but if anyone cares to help out, let me know. I think it needs to be either sections of retired and independent, alphabetical order (with the letters listed) or some other way. It certainly needs to be neater. RobJ1981 17:10, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

I have nominated them for deletion, the vote is at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Northern Championship Wrestling. TJ Spyke 22:41, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Pro Wrestling stubs

  • With 605 (from my last count) it's way too big: [[4]]. Anyone care to help me out with them? Many look to be non-notable wrestlers and should be easily deleted. While others just need much more information. Some subcategories wouldn't hurt either. Things like tag teams/groups, titles and shows could be possible subcats. RobJ1981 22:33, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
I suggested a professional wrestler bio stub a while back. We should really look to delete/merge some of these articles. --Jtalledo (talk) 01:26, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Well hopefully some subcategories can be created, because the stub section is in need of them. I've went through alot of the pages on just the first 200 stubs, and many appear to be notable former WWWF/WWF/WWE wrestlers, indy wrestlers, tag teams and so on. RobJ1981 05:16, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
I've created {{Prowrestling-bio-stub}} and Cat:Professional wrestling people stubs and I've listed the two on WikiProject Stub Sorting's To Do list. --Jtalledo (talk) 11:29, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
Was this ever proposed there? I can find no mention it anywhere in the WP:WSS archives. The stub guidelines indicate that new stub types should be suggested at WP:WSS/P for discussion for a week before their creation. It's a little non-plussing for something to appear on our "to do" list seemingly out of nowhere. Alai 01:55, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Brainbuster#Muscle Buster

Why is Muscle Buster categorised under Brainbuster? All other variations, and the original for that matter, are the head impacting on the mat while in the Muscle Buster the head doesn't even touch the mat at all and instead impacts the head and neck on the wrestlers shoulder. I know there is a neckbreaker variant listed at Neckbreaker#Elevated cradle neckbreaker but it still doesn't explain why Muscle Buster is characterised as a Brainbuster. --- Lid 04:28, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Anybody? --- Lid 08:48, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
Probably because how it's performed, like it sort of looks like a brainbuster. The only explanation I can really give is that it's because that's how it's more easily distinguished form the kneeling neckbreaker variation..
↪Lakes (Talk) 10:08, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
Easily distinguished was my guess too, but mislabelling it for the sake of avoiding confusion seems wrong. It should be moved to either Professional wrestling throws, Neckbreaker or Suplex as it's not a Brainbuster at all. --- Lid 10:36, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
I'm thinking of moving it to throws so if anyone wishes it to be moved elsewhere please respond soon. --- Lid 03:56, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Kayfabe disclaimer additions

I noticed that a lot of the wrestler pages are getting kayfabe disclaimer tags. I don't like this tag at all. It's effectively an excuse to keep the quality of writing, specifically the need to distinguish fact from fiction, at a poor standard. In addition, putting it an the beginning of the article is a huge eyesore. We should focus on improving the quality of the writing in the articles, not excusing its lapses with a note. --Jtalledo (talk) 10:30, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

I agree, I've never liked the kayfabe tag as it seems to serve no purpose other than a WRESTLING IS FAKE notice. It also leads credence to, as you mentioned, sloppy writing without explanation. I would be happier if the entire tag was done away with or at the very list get its usage reviews so it doesn't cover most of the tops of articles. --- Lid 10:40, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
I'm actually thinking of listing it for TFD. Professional wrestling fans already understand the nature of kayfabe so it's redundant to mention it to them, while even non-fans think that professional wrestling is "fake". The remaining people that might get confused would be better served if the article was tagged with {{fiction}} or {{tone}} and cleaned up. --Jtalledo (talk) 13:39, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
I would support a deletion, somebody is going around and adding it to a bunch of wrestling articles. I removed it from the Mark Henry article but someone put it back. TJ Spyke 22:36, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
A few months ago, I modded the template so it was in the form of a cleanup tag for articles and sections which are either written to make it seem that fictional events are real, or for worked shoots which are too hard to distinguish from real life --LBMixPro <Speak|on|it!> 07:54, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
I nominated it for deletion. Articles would be better served if they were cleaned up to distinguish fact and fiction. --Jtalledo (talk) 11:57, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

World Championship Wrestling alumni up for deletion

I figured that other people who edit wrestling articles might want to take note of this. It seems to have slipped under this wikiproject's radar. Night Gyr (talk/Oy) 17:01, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

It's not looking good for the article, but if it does pull through we're going to have to make it a project project and revamp it to look more like the WWE alumni page with the table that has stage name/real name/release date/notes. - Bdve 21:46, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
It's a bad deletion attempt, List and Categoried are 2 different things. I voted to keep it and think others should too. TJ Spyke 01:56, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

List of champions by age pages

  • Not so recently, I've came across one for TNA (for the X title, and the article is thankfully now gone). Here is several others: List of WWE world champions by age and List of ECW World Heavyweight Champions by age. I believe I marked them, but I don't know if I did it correctly. Anyway, my opinion on them is... age lists are listcruft and really not needed here on Wikipedia. It's just pointless trivia that isn't very important. If people want to make age pages, put it on a wrestling wiki, or your own created wrestling site, not here. What does everyone else think about the age lists pages? RobJ1981 00:19, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

End of Attitude Era

Someone really needs to change the Attitude Era from Wrestlemania X7 to Wrestlemania X8. Wrestlemania X8 was the last PPV to advertise the Attitude Era not X7. The logos were still around after X7, why is X7 listed as the end of the Attitude Era? LC6 12:45, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

What article is your suggestion in reference to? Deputy Marshall 10:13, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Championship Succession boxes

What's the project's position on Championship Succession boxes? I'd be happy to add them to a whole bunch of people's pages (and have been adding them to new stub articles I've been creating, eg. Jaguar Yokota), but I have a couple questions. Firstly, I noticed the task of adding them is not on the Project To Do list, so are they desirable in the opinion of the project membership? And, secondly, should they be added for every championship a notable wrestler has won (even non-notable championships), or only the championships that have their own article already? And, while we're on the topic, I would personally like to add some dates to those boxes, perhaps the duration of the championship (eg. January 29, 1984 to April 1, 1988). What does everyone think? Geoffg 05:02, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Because of this message I just noticed that the projects view on succession was removed from to do. If you look at the top of the page you'll see the current way to display championship succession which I just re-added. Succession boxes are not used anymore and wherever possible the new version is used. --- Lid 05:13, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
Okay. Thanks. Are the championships to be ordered by promotion and then date won (eg. List of championships and accomplishments won by Ric Flair)? I ask because it seems that under the "limited-information" scenario, they are being ordered by promotion and then name of title, and this order could be extended to the expanded version as well.Geoffg 08:30, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
Convention is alphabetically by promotion and the championships in the promotion by date won. --- Lid 08:33, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
If only we could hide/show the Defeated to and Lost to lines.--Aaru Bui 13:39, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Gladys Gillem/"World's Oldest Wrestler?"

On the Gladys Gillem article, someone reverted my edit in which I removed the claim that she is the world's oldest professional wrestler (which was presented as fact on the page, and is just a publicity claim on her part). Just to avoid any unpleasentness, are there any wrestlers who are alive that were born before 1923? I know Mae Young and the Fabulous Moolah were also born in the same year, but anyone before that is still alive? Check the talk page of the Gladys Gillem article for more details. Thanks. Burgwerworldz 23:55, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Black Shadow was born in 1921 and is still alive. Hope that helps.--Darren Jowalsen 03:44, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Steve Romero

Has anyone seen Steve Romero on WWE TV since Velocity was cancelled? Does anyone know what he is doing now? From The Holy Trinity of Sports Entertainment

  • I don't think he has been on TV. I haven't read he was fired...so he has some backstage role in WWE I would assume. RobJ1981 04:00, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
I'd just presume he's a sitting duck without any work to do at the moment. He certainly hasn't been fired though. Normy132 04:10, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
He does a little news bit during Canadian airings of WWE programs advertising upcoming houseshows in Canada and such. --James Duggan 04:13, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
I imagine he will be fired then, there are other people who could do that. He was never that good of an announcer anyways. TJ Spyke 05:58, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
I think I saw him on WWE 24/7 this morning. I'll check it out a little later. Bdve 21:08, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
Indeed he's hosting, or at least introing, "The Big Ones" on 24/7 on Comcast. - Bdve 01:29, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Mean Gene's Burgers

On the Gene Okerlund page, it mentions about the trademark lawsuit he had about his fast food chain. I'm pretty sure that it was decided, and it was posted somewhere, so that should be updated by someone who's good at transcribing legal news. I think he lost, and he is appealing. Burgwerworldz 04:43, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

PWI Years

I think we should try and create at least stubs for all the wrestlers on the PWI Years article, as if they are in the top 500, they are surely worthy of an article. I challenge you to name another fairly mainstream sport where any of the top 500 athletes in that sport have no article. It's ridiculous! Kingfisherswift 15:17, 22 August 2006 (UTC)


Please clarify for me - sport or performing art

I'm slightly confused - If I read any of the WWE or associated articles, they all basically start with a link to the professional wrestling page. That defines professional wrestling as a performing art. So why do all of the articles about WWE have places in the sports Category?

I have been discussing the matter over at the pump prior to coming here

--Charlesknight 17:02, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

It's debatable, but I don't think professional wrestling fits into any of those categories. Classifying it as sport is not entirely accurate and classifying performing art doesn't seem right either. --Jtalledo (talk) 17:14, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

There is a Sports entertainment category? surely that is the one that should be used?

--Charlesknight 17:16, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

No, although there is one for professional wrestling. A sports entertainment category might be a good idea though. --Jtalledo (talk) 17:23, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

It already exists? Professional wrestling is within it

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Sports_entertainment

--Charlesknight 17:37, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

While it's not a 100% realistic sport, I do think that it should be included in categories like "Sports in xxxx" for the PPV's. TJ Spyke 21:10, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

-- What's a PPV? A sport does not have a pre-determined outcome - which is why the wikipedia page we have on Professional wrestling does not class it as a sport. That's why I find it odd that we have all the WWE pages linking to a page that *specific* states that it's not a sport yet we are using the sport categories. I think I'm going to draw up a policy proposal or something similar on the matter. --Charlesknight 21:25, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Samoa Joe's real name

Back in July we had a long discussion on page names and which pages should go where based on who owns the trademark etc. A part of that discussion was the revelation that Samoa Joe's fullname wasn't Joe Seanoa but Nuufolau Joel Seanoa, as per the trademark on his name. At the time Dubhagan e-mailed Joe to see his response to it.

I forgot about it until recently and after conversing with Dubhagan I found out he had never received a response from Joe and assumed it was because Joe doesn't want this information known.

Should the article list his real name as Nuufolau Joel (Joe) Seanoa (the name listed on the Samoa Joe trademark) or simply Joe Seanoa (the name he uses to refer to himself outside of wrestling)? --- Lid 00:54, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Whether or not he wants his real name known isn't a reason to add it or not. If it's an encylcopedia and it can be sourced it should go in there. I can think of at least two other articles that have gone through the same thing and came to the same conclusion MC Frontalot and Criss Angel. While neither one of them (supposedly) wanted their real names to be "out there" they could both be documented and as such were recorded on their articles. - Bdve 01:33, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
Do people have to use their full legal name when registering trademarks? If so, then put that in his article as his name. TJ Spyke 02:16, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Ganso Bomb

A user at Talk:Powerbomb has brought up that Lou Thesz did not invent the powerbomb by accident and has said it existed for years as well as being done on purpose by Lou Thesz when it first occurred. I am not well versed in this subject so can someone come to the talk page with better knowledge than I take a look at the situation? --- Lid 07:20, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

John Cena & a perma-lock

If you check the history of the John Cena page you'll see that it gets targeted incredibly heavy, especially after and leading up to pay per views, sometimes getting straight vandalized up to 20 times in a day. The idea of asking for aome kind of permanent lock on the page which would only allow for a few trusted people to edit it when needed has been brought up on the talk page. How would the project feel about trying something like this out on some of the harder hit wrestling pages? I don't know how we'd decide who would be patrolling which pages, but that's a bridge to cross when we get to it should we decide to go that route, I think. - Bdve 05:17, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Is it vandalized by anonymous users alot? If that's the case, use a semi-protect lock on it. Otherwise, get a perma-lock I suppose. RobJ1981 05:21, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
It comes from users and anons. - Bdve 05:22, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
If it's the same people, then they need to be reported. That should help to a point at least. RobJ1981 05:30, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

User:JB196

We've been over this before back in April but it seems that enough time has passed that he's decided to start doing it again. I've reverted it for now but what should we be done? --- Lid 09:24, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

yea i have had to revert some of his "move list by.." edits again... i just think if he want credit for producing move list on Obsessed With Wrestling then he should get credit on their website not on Wiki. --- Paulley
Still going at it on Vic Grimes' page. --- Lid 07:02, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
Report it. There is no need for an edit war. RobJ1981 07:07, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Kurt Angle

I suggest keeping a close watch on this article - WWE.com has posted notice of his contract release, and all of the markboards are abuzz with markish speculation. - Chadbryant 22:28, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Screw the "close watch" - can we get a semiprotect? The anon marks are out in full force. - Chadbryant 22:49, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Professional wrestling triple-team maneuvers

Does anyone know why this article needs to exist? Triple teams are a rarity in wrestling, excluding if we're talking about Dragon Gate and Lucha Libre, and then the team pages can easily cover the signature three man moves. --- Lid 06:44, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Please delete, like yuou said multi person manuevers can easly be explain in the articles rather that making a new page... ala recent problems involving an anon user and Spirit Squad's "high spirits" move --- Paulley

To-do list

Can someone make the to-do list smaller? It's too big. I tried to clean it up, but the stuff I deleted was added back to it. Some of the long-term, on-going stuff can be put in the Strategy subpage or placed in the style guide. --Jtalledo (talk) 12:28, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Well, I'm sure that the Articles to Expand section can be linked to Category:Professional wrestling stubs as all those articles under that heading are listed there, as are others. --James Duggan 20:52, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
I'm not sure how to format it, but I've requested that WWE Undisputed Championship should be merged into WWE Championship and that King Booker's Court should be merged into Booker Huffman. Could someone add it to the to-do list for me please? --James Duggan 20:55, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
If you think stuff could be put to a subpage then talk about it. Don't just randomly delete stuff. Now the style guide stuff is important for new articles too, so they could go to the project page itself.
↪Lakes (Talk) 21:20, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
Randomly? There was nothing random about it. Most of that stuff I deleted was already on the Strategy subpage. At any rate, that's why we're discussing it now. ;) --Jtalledo (talk) 22:13, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
Um, the strategy page is the to-do list. --James Duggan 22:41, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
lol. Didn't notice that. --Jtalledo (talk) 22:43, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

List of Extreme Championship Wrestling alumni

Um, I thought this page was only for the original ECW? Someone went and added WWE info for it, even though the current ECW wrestlers are actually under WWE contract, not ECW contracts. I think the current incarnation of ECW should be left out of it since it is not seperate from WWE like the original was. --James Duggan 21:24, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

I think wrestlers who only competed for the ECW version should be removed, it would be like having a page for alumni of Raw or alumni of SmackDown. TJ Spyke 07:48, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
ECW version? Don't you mean the WWE version of ECW? --James Duggan 17:48, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
Yeah, that what I meant. I was typing that at 2AM. Wrestlers who only competed for the WWE version should not be included. TJ Spyke 20:24, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
The page needs major editing, since the ECW brand of WWE seems to be a big part of the article. RobJ1981 21:09, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
I cleaned up the page, hopefully it doesn't happen again. I wonder if the WCW alumni page is the same? I looked it at a little, and didn't notice any WWE stars (during the Invasion storyline) that shouldn't be on the list. RobJ1981 21:18, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
Actually, we both did, I was still cleaning it up when you finishes. Not that it matters. I don't think WCW would be a problem because there were only a few Alliance members who didn't compete in the original WCW(like Test and Kurt Angle). TJ Spyke 21:49, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Edit war on The Highlanders (professional wrestling)

There's a little edit war between RAMistheMAN and me at The Highlanders (professional wrestling). I don't think it's necessary to include week-by-week detail about their career, but Ram thinks it's necessary. --Jtalledo (talk) 22:32, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Not even worth calling it an edit war, obviously week by week stuff is not necessary. Keep deleting it, drop him a note on his user page. - Bdve 22:48, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
I did drop him a note and put a note on the talk page as well, but it keeps getting added back in. Ah well. --Jtalledo (talk) 22:50, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
I'd direct him to this WikiProject and its policies. --James Duggan 22:54, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
Yeah, good idea, it looks like Bdve tagged the article's talk page. --Jtalledo (talk) 22:56, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
RAM has done this with other articles as well. TJ Spyke 07:46, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
He's doing the same thing with Jeff Hardy, even after I told him to stop. TJ Spyke 07:14, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
I'd say report him then if he's doing more harm than good. --James Duggan 07:33, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Hide/show championship succession

You think it'll be a good idea to be able to hide and show the Won from and Lost to lines? Msybe something like this? It looks a bit messy now but maybe if someone fixes up the code?


 
 
 
 
With this format we probably need to wikify every person or team listed. --- Lid 01:40, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
I think it looks good. Do you mean they all need to be linked, even those that don't have articles? Why is that? -- Geoffg 05:36, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

I've had a little play around and I came up with this:

The problem is that it means having to get rid of having the reigns in chronological order and quite a hefty bit of HTML (though I think templates could solve the latter). --Oakster (Talk) 14:39, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

List of title defenses

[[6]] [[7]] Why were these even made? It's listcruft and useless trivia that doesn't belong here. Ring of Honor is a popular indy fed, but either way.. a list of title defenses certainly doesn't belong here. I put prods on all three, and I'll wait and see what happens. But they should just be AFD'd and then removed. RobJ1981 02:05, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

    • It also looks like all they did was copy the info that ROH lists on their website, so there is a copyright issue as well. Even if Copywright wasn't a problem I would support deleting these. 07:44, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
I put AFD on the world heavyweight defenses (since the prod was deleted). Even if they are copyright issues, it's still useless trivia that doesn't belong here. I'm surprised the articles lasted so long, without getting deleted. RobJ1981 18:52, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
They were made because the defenses were previously part of the articles on the titles themselves and made the tables ridiculously long. I did NOT copy-and-paste anything from their site, and frankly resent the implication. Tromboneguy0186 05:06, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
All three are AFD now. It's fancruft, listcruft...and simply just useless trivia. Title defenses aren't needed here. If I find any others, they will just tagged AFD right away. I tried just a prod to start, but of course people delete them... because they fail to realize it's just fancruft. RobJ1981 00:27, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

The Mass Diva Search Deletion Proposals

Over five Diva Search contestant articles have been proposed for deletion over the past week. Personally, I oppose most of the deletions, but I'd like us to form a coherent policy on this. I think if we're going to delete the articles, we should merge contestant information into another page, be it WWE Diva Search or something like Minor contestants of the WWE Diva Search, I'm not sure. I just don't want to purge all the information we have here. Thoughts? -Umdunno 00:39, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

I think it should depend on what happened after they were eliminated. If they never appeared on WWE TV again of got WWE contracts, then maybe no. Otherwise I think they should be kept. TJ Spyke 01:21, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
I agree with TJ. If they simply did nothing after the diva search, they don't need an article. I'm strongly against a minor contestants page, it would be just useless trivia for one thing, and for another... it would encourage people to re-create minor diva search pages for some or all of the contestants. RobJ1981 01:25, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
The ones that got contracts from the most recent search are -
  • Layla El
  • Maryse Ouellet
  • Rebecca DiPietro
  • Milena Roucka (up for AFD)
  • Amy Zidian (locked from recreation due to people creating repeatedly before she got a contract, needs a deletion review to get re-made) --- Lid 02:23, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
Yeah, if they didn't do anything noteworthy after the Diva Search, then they probably shouldn't have articles. Is there a precedent set by articles on contestants on other reality contests? --Jtalledo (talk) 02:27, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
Another problem: A lot of these women are affiliated with Playboy or modeling in some fashion, and have had minor acting roles. How should we assess notability in these cases? -Umdunno 03:39, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
Milena Roucka sorry, linked to wrong name. --- Lid 03:44, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
Update: Amy Zidian is now up for deletion review. --- Lid 04:39, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
Well, the winner should have an article, and those who are regulars on WWE programming (not necessarily by just being signed) should have articles. I don't think being in the contest itself asserts notability. And being a playboy model is iffy, they have so many different magazines and websites, I don't think that asserts notability by default. And most of the acting credits that these contestants have are just bit parts in minor movies, not even close to notable. Also keep track that many pages have been deleted and protected, including two of the top 3 from this year's search. Quality, not quantity, is what WP and we need. Renosecond 04:16, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Grand Slam Champion

Just read the edit history and the talk page. Tells the whole story. Tromboneguy0186 05:04, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

And this obviously impacts Rob Van Dam and John Layfield as well. We need a strict consensus and probably a semi-protect since this anon just won't quit. Tromboneguy0186 05:11, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Alumni pages

Not only do we have alumni pages, but we also have alumni categories. I was thinking, do we really need both? If we can list the wrestlers in an alumni category, are the alumni pages really necessary? --James Duggan 08:22, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, this was the reason List of WCW alumni was up for deletion a while ago. It seems rather redundant, although the lists do include some extra info about the person's role in the promotion. --Jtalledo (talk) 12:10, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
A list and category is redundant. I think the categories for alumni should be deleted. The list pages are far more useful. RobJ1981 00:28, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Bryan Danielson Page, section: ROH World Champion

A few weeks ago, I asked if a mention and/or summary of every single defense of the ROH World Heavyweight Title was necessary on the entry's discussion page (unfortunately I had a brainfart and forgot to sign it). It seems that the suggestion has gone on deaf ears, as it didn't receive any response and users continue to update after every single title defense. Does including every title defense in that section constitute "week by week" updates? I'd be interested to see some feedback on this, as the last thing I want to do is to start a huge Edit War on that page and I'm still not quite 100% certain as to my stance on the issue (though I do think it's gotten out of hand). Deputy Marshall 10:23, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Someone has taken it further and created a page of EVERY title defense in the title's histories. Title defenses are not really notable. TJ Spyke 21:07, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Capt. Lou Albano

His page is badly in need of an update and/or revision! Take a look and you will see what I mean! --Smart Mark Greene 10:38, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Wrestlemania DVD changes

I'm going to create a section in recent Wrestlemania Articles about the changes on the DVD. Does anyone know of a website that outlines the differences? I had a couple of links but lost them in a hard drive crash. Kyros 21:19, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

I don't think those are notable enough to go in the articles. TJ Spyke 21:26, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
Agreed. -- bulletproof 3:16 22:10, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
You do not think it's notable enough that the WWE alters the original show. For example, removing the boos in the Goldberg-Lesnar match and putting in cheers. Also, editing the the Mickie James/Trish Stratus match to remove the crotch grab and the botched finished. Also, the removal of Jesse Ventura's commentary from the original events. I think it's notable because it alters what really happened during that event. Kyros 00:46, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
I don't think it's notable enough that it needs a full on section in every article, but where the changes are major (like the ones you just mentioned) they could be mentioned in the notes sections. Bdve
They did not remove Jesse Ventura's commentary. Rent or buy the WrestleMania Anthology set and you will see(or hear) that his commentary is still there. TJ Spyke 01:57, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
A section has already been provided in the main WrestleMania article. See [8] -- bulletproof 3:16 02:02, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
Go take a look at Jesse Ventura's article Kyros 02:12, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
I think you're reading it wrong, which isn't unusual because the Ventura thing has been confusing to a lot of people. Ventura's commentary is removed from a lot of older VHS/DVDs, but it is all there for the recent box set. Bdve
You making a crack about my reading ability :-) lol. All I'm want to do is similar to what IMDB has on their page, Alternate Version. Kyros 02:19, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
DVD changes aren't notable, leave them off. RobJ1981 03:40, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
I do not understand how they are not notable. Heck, there is an article that outlines changes in Star Wars List of changes in Star Wars re-releases. Listing the changes counteracts the WWE's revisionist history because that is what they are doing, revising wrestling/sports entertainment history Kyros 06:24, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../w/i/k/Wikipedia_talk%7EWikiProject_Professional_wrestling_Archive_13_b694.html"