User talk:LAX

[edit] Hey

As an admin can you move WWE Friday Night SmackDown! to WWE Friday Night SmackDown because only admins at the time can move that page, and it had been agreed earlier at WT:PW to remove the "!". Thanks--SRX 14:30, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Well I was planning on doing it this weekend, since for me its a four day weekend, but Matt has done most of it. So I can't do anything really anymore, plus I feel that SummerSlam 2000 doesn't have GA-potential at the moment, but I plan on working on it in the summer (my summer break). ;) Just a heads up me and Blue will work on List of WCW World Tag Team Champions to make it an FL, but question, the title was last known as the WCW Tag Team Championship under the WWF, should it be renamed that, or should it be kept the same way?--SRX 15:32, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] One Night Stand 2008

So what if the match background makes it longer? The article is supposed to be informative. That's what gets us good article ratings. —Preceding unsigned comment added by DeadmanUndertaker (talk • contribs) 18:31, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

What about Featured Articles? DeadmanUndertaker 18:35, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

By the way Judgment Day's theme song didn't have a source and we all knew that was the song, so why do you keep deleting the One Night Stand theme song? DeadmanUndertaker 18:38, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

I have listened to it several times on WWE TV. DeadmanUndertaker 18:42, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

I don't really see your point since wwe.com didn't put the theme song on the website for Judgment Day. DeadmanUndertaker 18:46, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Fine. Still I don't see why you keep deleting the theme song. Oh well, Good Day. DeadmanUndertaker 18:53, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Why?

Why do you always get rid of my information?. I am trying to expand/improve articles and your just getting rid of it. Why do you do that for. I never do that to you, so why do you do that to me. Cheers.- Cimmo (talk) 12:19, 25 May (UTC)

If I get adopted, can you be the person that will help me with editing and stuff like that, because you seem like a really cool person and a person who knows alot about Wikipedia. Cheers.- Cimmo (talk) 6:40, 26 May (UTC)

I want you to be my adopter because you know alot about Wikipedia. I sent a message to SRX saying to drop himself as my adopter. So when that is done, I'll send you another message to tell you when you can be my adopter. Cheers.- Cimmo (talk) 8:20 31 May (UTC)

Can you adopt me? Cheers.- Cimmo (talk) 8:25 31 May (UTC)

Ok. Thanks for adpoting me. Cheers.- Cimmo (talk) 7:32 1 June (UTC)

Hey, you said before that I had to ask questions, so I'm going to do that. How do I put sources and references on a wrestling article? Cheers.- Cimmo (talk) 7:36 1 June (UTC)

I don't really understand, but I dont need to know because people can do that for me. So how do I promote a article to Good Article status, becuase on your user page you have promoted alot of articles to Good Article status. Cheers.- Cimmo (talk) 9:24 1 June (UTC)

What articles are you currently working on? Whatever ones your working on I'll help you with them. Cheers.- Cimmo (talk) 9:37 1 June (UTC)

Can you still expand/improve articles that have been elevated to Good Article status? I am just curious to know. Cheers.- Cimmo (talk) 9:24 1 June (UTC)

I would really like to work on Backlash (2007), because it looks like it needs to have a bit more information before it can be elevated to Good Article status. What do you think? Cheers.- Cimmo (talk) 9:47 1 June (UTC)

[edit] Relevant

You deleted my comment due to it being irrelevant. It was relevant, I was trying to point out that because Undertaker was 16-0 doesn't mean he will stick around. I was using Ric Flair as an example with 16 World Championships. ^{-GuffasBorgz7-} 04:41, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] User:IMatthew/Sandbox

Good work so far. I've made some comments on it, which are useful in the development of the article. Please see them here. Thanks, D.M.N. (talk) 14:49, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

I think it's impossible to find the exact superstars that were suspended. However, Sports Illustrated had a list of 14 that were tied to drug ring.

• Chris Benoit
• Eddie Guerrero
• Chavo Guerrero
• Shane Helms
• Randy Orton
• John Hennigan
• Ken Anderson
• Shoichi Funaki
• Brian Adams
• Charles Haas
• Edward Fatu
• Darren Matthews
• Adam Copeland
• Sylvain Grenier

Out of those, three are deceased, bringing it down to 11; and Grenier wasn't with WWE by the end of August 2007, bringing you the ten. It may be to a certain degree OR, but if you can back it up by saying that angles were played out to remove superstars from TV (for instance; Chavo had to say I Quit against Rey; Triple H literally destroyed Umaga with the slegehammer; Morrison lost the ECW title) it should be OK. D.M.N. (talk) 18:20, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Benoit, Eddie, and Adams are dead. Helms and Copeland were already out injured. Like D.M.N. said, Umaga was destroyed by Triple H, Chavo lost the I Quit match, and Morrison lost the title. Sylvain was gone already. I believe that Mathews, Haas, Funaki, and Anderson just disappeared. Orton was not suspended, but I believe he lost a month of pay, and didn't appear at house shows. King iMatthew 2008 18:50, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

achually Ken Anderson was supended (kayfabe) for pretending to be Mr.McMahon's son.67.189.185.73 (talk) 23:38, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] WP:PW Barnstar

		The Professional Wrestling Barnstar
		You deserve this. Woohoo 855 23:41, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome. you really deserved it. Can I help you out with anything. Woohoo 855 23:49, 26 May 2008 (UTC) You sure. Maybe a new signiture or something?Woohoo 855 23:57, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Here look at the sig i made you.I know you won't use it but i thought you should see it. LAXWoohoo 855 00:09, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Do you like the sig i made you. I make sigs now.<Left>Right^North~ 22:40, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

please anwser me LAX so i can see if i make good sigs. SexyAirEagle 01:12, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

please tell everyone i am retiring. RetiringReallySoon 22:48, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Are you gonna nominate SummerSlam '04 to GA? --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 02:34, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Oh, I was just wondering. ;) --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 16:38, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] name

Hey, do you know if i can change my name from Srmagnetismo to HAMM? I need it. ҢДMM®(Hundry Marquina!) 01:27, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Signpost updated for May 19th and 26th, 2008.

Weekly Delivery

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 08:01, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] FYI

Please see this and this as soon as possible. Thanks, D.M.N. (talk) 09:14, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

... and when you do, please just relax and not worry about it. Let's not overreact here, please, until we have further information - Alison ^❤ 09:22, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Hey!

Hey, I think Backlash (2007) needs to be expanded/improved. Do you want to help me with the expanding/improving?. Cheers.- Cimmo (talk) 9:57 1 June (UTC)

Ok. I'll look for a different article. Cheers.- Cimmo (talk) 9:57 1 June (UTC)

I can't find one to expand/improve. What do you recommended that I should work on with you?. Cheers.- Cimmo (talk) 10:30 1 June (UTC)

Will you help me with WrestleMania 22?, because it needs sources or references that appear in reliable, third-party publications. Cheers.- Cimmo (talk) 10:44 1 June (UTC)

Of course. Do you want to rewrite it by yourself or with me? It's clearly up to you. Cheers.- Cimmo (talk) 10:53 1 June (UTC)

On WrestleMania 22 the aftermath needs to be expanded/improved. I'll expand it and you can just put the sources and references were they have to be. but if it aint good enough for you, you can just rewrite the way you want it to be written. Cheers.- Cimmo (talk) 10:58 1 June (UTC)

Ok. Sounds good to me to. Cheers.- Cimmo (talk) 11:01 1 June (UTC)

Since your working on the Background and lead for WrestleMania 22, what do you recommend that I should work on for Wrestlemania 22?. Cheers.- Cimmo (talk) 12:45 1 June (UTC)

After we have finished working on WrestleMania 22, do you want to nominate it so it can be elevated to Good Article status? Cheers.- Cimmo (talk) 4:45 1 June (UTC)

Have you finished working on the Background and Lead for Wrestlemania 22. I've finished working on the Aftermath and I fixed up the event a little bit. Cheers.- Cimmo (talk) 7:12 2 June (UTC)

What else do you reckon we have to work on for WrestleMania 22, I fixed up the event and aftermath and you fixed up the lead and background. What else do we have to do? After we have finished working on Wrestlemania 22 do you want to work on another article with me? Cheers.- Cimmo (talk) 8:18 2 June (UTC)

Hey, I think that we should nominate WrestleMania 22 for a Good Article, because I think we have finished working on it. Cheers.- Cimmo (talk) 8:42 7 June (UTC)

On Wrestlemania 22, I didnt write those extra notes, someone else did not me. Just letting you know, I'm not angry at you or nothing its just that I didnt write those notes. Cheers.- Cimmo (talk) 4:34 7 June (UTC)

You said that you would rewrite the lead. Ok, I'll try to shorten and/or reworded the event and aftermath. And i thought you were taking a wikibreak. Cheers.- Cimmo (talk) 12:59, 8 June (UTC)

Why, I dont know alot about Wikipedia. Well if you insist then go ahead. Cimmo (talk) 4:11, 8 June (UTC)

And by the way, I am trying to learn about how to write a good article, with people who are helping me, but you have to be the one that is a genius dont you?. Cimmo (talk) 4:16, 8 June (UTC)

How do I write a good wrestling article? Cheers.- Cimmo (talk) 7:40, 9 June (UTC)

Pay-per view, by the way whats a biography?. Cheers.- Cimmo (talk) 7:46, 9 June (UTC)

Would you be able to move my discussions into another talk page. Because it looks a bit to long. Cheers.- Cimmo (talk) 7:57, 9 June (UTC)

[edit] Recent edits

In the last few minutes, I have been making additions to the WrestleMania articles. The information is accurate, due to the fact that the majority of information can be found in either the events themselves (easily findable on DVD (and originally VHS), or in magazines and magazine suppliments sch as PWI and it's spin-off magazines or the WWE's own magazine. As such, the information I have supplied is as factual as possible, and when I make any mistakes in an edit, I make a point to make the corrections myself.

Furthermore, the 'fancruft' tag strikes me as redundant. As does 'Original research.' All research is at some point 'original'. As such, if 'original research' is not allowed on Wikipedia, why does Wikipedia exist at all? As new information becomes available, and is almost immediately made available on wikipedia, that informastion is at some point original research no matter where or what the source of the information is. This strikes me as running counter to wikipedia's very purpose. Either Wikipedia IS something that anyone can edit and make changes to so long as the information is accurate regardless of who provides the information, or it is NOT. And from what I've been seeing by the constant undoing of information I have made efforts to include, since the articles seem to vary between whether or not notes are included in the WrestleMania articles or aren't, it seems to be leaning towards the idea that Wikipedia is NOT something anyone can add information to if the information is accurate.

In other words, I would request that the Wikipedia staff please reconsider it's stance on 'original research' because it seems to impede the very idea behind allowing people to add information to an article simply because of who might have done the research to find this information. It is both unfair and pointless. Such an impediment makes Wikipedia seem like it shouldn't even be around if 'original research' is grounds for the removal of an edit.

I'm sorry, but that's the way I see it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.76.203.29 (talk) 00:41, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Help?

Hey want to help me and Blue with List of WCW World Tag Team Champions?--SRX^--LatinoHeat 17:51, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Second round of WikiCup

The second round of the WikiCup has begun! It now runs until July 31.

SoxBot II (talk) 23:20, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Question?

Hi! and sorry to bother you but I just got done yesterday with doing the report on TNA Lockdown 2008 and I just want to make sure I did it right. So if you have the time could you read the Background, Event, and Aftermath on the page and tell me what I did wrong and how I can fix it. Thank you for your time.--WillC (talk) 23:44, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] another barnstar

		The Half Barnstar
		You work well improving articles with iMatthew SexySeaClownfish 23:13, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] WP:HAU

Hello yet again. I regretfully inform you that the bot we were using to update the user status at Wikipedia:Highly Active Users, SoxBot V, was blocked for its constant updating. With this bot out of operation, a patch is in the works. Until that patch is reviewed and accepted by the developers, some options have been presented to use as workarounds: 1) Qui monobook (not available in Internet Explorer); 2) User:Hersfold/StatusTemplate; 3) Manually updating User:StatusBot/Status/USERNAME; or 4) Not worry about it and wait for the patch to go through, which hopefully won't take long. If you have another method, you can use that, too. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me. Useight (talk) 17:56, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Rollback

I would like rollback.I promise not to abuse it and use it for vandalism only.Xp54321 ^{(Hello!,Contribs)} 21:50, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Signpost updated for June 2, 2008.

Weekly Delivery

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 08:22, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Question

When you write a good article do you have to have sources and references or whatever they are? Yeah, I want my talk page archived. Cheers.- Cimmo (talk) 8:05 9 June (UTC)

Ok. Do you want to work on an article with me, If I look for one. But If you help me, I'll help you. Cheers.- Cimmo (talk) 8:14 9 June (UTC)

I didnt really have an article in mind, but If you want to work on Vengeance (2004) thats fine. I wrote some information on that article, but If you want to work on Vengeance, then I will. Cheers.- Cimmo (talk) 8:31 9 June (UTC)

Do you mind if I not work on Vengeance (2004) with you, because I want to look for another article to work on with you. Cheers.- Cimmo (talk) 4:20 10 June (UTC)

I can't find one. What do you think I should work on with you. I dont want to work on Vengeance. Cheers.- Cimmo (talk) 9:18 11 June (UTC)

I want to work on Vengeance now with you, because I can't find an article to work on. Cheers.- Cimmo (talk) 9:55 11 June (UTC)

How come your not working on Armageddon (2005) anymore. Cheers.- Cimmo (talk) 3:52 11 June (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject Good articles newsletter

The Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles Newsletter

The WikiProject Good Articles Newsletter Volume I, No. 8 - June 2008 May issue Project News There are currently 4,266 Good Articles listed at WP:GA. The backlog at Good Article Nominations is 157 unreviewed articles. Out of 215 total nominations, 44 are on hold, 13 are under review, and one is seeking a second opinion. Please go to WP:GAN and review an article or three as soon as you have a chance! The oldest unreviewed articles are: Choctaw, One Night Stand (2007), Justin Tuck, Tristan Tzara, The Stake Out (Seinfeld episode), Impalement arts, Backlash (2007), Adelaide Rams, and Sam Cowan. The categories with the largest backlogs are: Theatre, film and drama (31), Sports and recreation (31), Transport (24), Music (13), and Art and architecture (11) The backlog at Good Article Reassessment currently stands at 4 articles up for re-review. GA Sweeps Update The GA Sweeps process is progressing nicely! During the month of May, a total of 82 articles were reviewed. Of that total, 71 were found to continue to meet the GA criteria, and 11 were delisted. There are currently 15 articles that are still on hold in this process, awaiting revisions. We are once again recruiting new sweeps participants. Candidates should be very strong and comfortable in reviewing GA and familiar with the GA processes and criteria. If you are interested, please contact OhanaUnited for details. GAN Reviewer of the Month Giggy (talk · contribs) (a.k.a. Dihydrogen Monoxide (talk · contribs)) is the GAN Reviewer of the Month for May, based on the assessments made by Dr. Cash on the number and thoroughness of the reviews made by individual reviewers each week. Giggy had a whopping 45 reviews during the month of May! Congratulations to Giggy (talk · contribs) on being May's GAN Reviewer of the Month! Other outstanding reviewers during the month of May include: Ealdgyth (talk · contribs) Eustress (talk · contribs) GaryColemanFan (talk · contribs) Ice Cold Beer (talk · contribs) Juliancolton (talk · contribs) Nikki311 (talk · contribs) ThinkBlue (talk · contribs) Yllosubmarine (talk · contribs) Also, with 19 nominations, Mitchazenia (talk · contribs) is the nominator of the month, followed by TonyTheTiger (talk · contribs) with 8 nominations submitted. Member News There are now 216 members of WikiProject Good Articles! Welcome to the 6 new members that joined during the month of April: Jack Bethune (talk · contribs) Jordan Timothy James Busson (talk · contribs) Limetolime (talk · contribs) Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim Fan (talk · contribs) Mm40 (talk · contribs) Redmarkviolinist (talk · contribs) This WikiProject, and the Good Article program as a whole, would not be where it is today without each and every one of its members! Thank you to all! New GA Review Process - Review Subpages In case you haven't noticed, we initiated a new process for GA Reviews at the end of last month. The {{GA nominee}} template was modified to direct new reviews initiated on an article to begin on a subpage of article talkspace (e.g. [[Talk:Article/GA#]], where '#' is the current number of GA reviews conducted for the article, incremented automatically, starting with 1). The primary reason for this change is to address some concerns made by several Wikipedians that previous GA reviews are not easily accessible in archives, the way that featured article reviews and peer reviews are, since the review is conducted on the article's talkspace, instead of in a subpage of the featured article space or peer review space. The reason we opted to move GA reviews to article talkspace (instead of GA space) is to better maintain the personal relationship between editor(s) and reviewer(s) by keeping reviews done in an area where editors can easily access it. Nonetheless, we still desired to have better archiving and maintenance of past reviews, so that GA ultimately becomes more accountable. When an article is nominated, the nominator adds the template using a substitution, by adding {{subst:GAN|subtopic=<name of subtopic for article at GAN>}}, as well as lists the article (as usual) at WP:GAN in the appropriate category. When a reviewer initiates a review of an article, all that needs to be done is to read the template on the article's {{GA nominee}} template on its talk page, and click on the link to start the review. When the reviewer clicks on that link, they will also see some instructions on how to start a review of a GAN. For new reviewers, there's also a link to the Good Article criteria, as well as to the Wikipedia:Reviewing good articles page and the mentors list. Once an article is reviewed, the GA review page should be transcluded onto the main article talk page, by adding {{Talk:Article/GA#}} to the bottom of the talk page. This is to ensure maintain the transparency of the GA process, as well as to make editors of the article in question aware that the review is taking place. When an article is either passed or failed, there's really nothing different to do in the process, although reviewers are encouraged to utilize the {{ArticleHistory}} template, linking to the GA review subpage with the 'action#link' parameter. Did You Know... ... that there are slightly more than twice as many Good Articles (4,266) as there are Featured Articles? ... that Giggy has some really neat and useful tools to assist reviewers in conducting their reviews? ... that there are ten experienced reviewers listed on the GA mentors list that can offer assistance or a second opinion in reviewing articles? From the Editors A GA working party has initiated discussion on ways to improve the Good Article project and processes. The goal of the working party is to come up with suggestions for improvement based on recent issues and concerns raised in the past, primarily in the wake of the Great Green Dot Debate of May 2008. The discussion can be found here. Members of the working party include: Dank55 (talk · contribs), Derek.cashman (talk · contribs), EyeSerene (talk · contribs), Giggy (talk · contribs), Gwinva (talk · contribs), LaraLove (talk · contribs), Nehrams2020 (talk · contribs), and OhanaUnited (talk · contribs). Please leave any comments or feedback regarding this issue here. Contributors to this Issue Dr. Cash (Lead Editor, Distributor) Improving Wikipedia one article at a time since 2005! WikiProject Good Articles: Open Tasks This project identifies, organizes and improves good articles on Wikipedia. Nominations: Backlash (2007) • Fort Jackson (Virginia) • The Great American Bash (2007) • Pacers-Pistons brawl Reassessment: Madonna (entertainer) • Sweeps / List: references (All Categories), image tags (All Categories), article quality (All Categories) Possible GAs Needing References: Clarinet • Carleton University • Appalachian Mountains Task forces: Project quality • Unreferenced GA Good article criteria | Statistics | GAN Report | Changes log Nominations queue: 214 articles (50 of them are on hold) as of 08:00, 12 June 2008 | edit

Delivered by the automated Giggabot (stop!) 01:48, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] MfD nomination of User:UBX/The Kliq

User:UBX/The Kliq, a page you created, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:UBX/The Kliq and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User:UBX/The Kliq during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. -- iMatthew _T.C. 20:54, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Corny template ;) -- iMatthew _T.C. 20:54, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Hey, I am gonna go ahead and delete it if there are not objections on your end. Tiptoety ^talk 00:25, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] GAB

Yeah I have no reason for that poster anymore. The other poster is going to be used on the page. So mine has no meaning now. I don't know how to delete it. I was just going to leave it on my page so it didn't get orphaned and wait to find a newer version but I have no reason now.--WillC 21:51, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] WWEs1Fan

I'm trying to revert an edit war for Night of Champions while keeping the information factual. As an admin (I believe you are one, correct?) are you able to put any more weight behind some warnings?  Hazardous Matt  16:38, 11 June 2008 (UTC)