Talk:One Night Stand (2008)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the One Night Stand (2008) article.
Article policies
WikiProject Professional wrestling
Professional wrestling
Portal
One Night Stand (2008) is within the scope of WikiProject Professional wrestling, an attempt to improve and standardize articles related to professional wrestling. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, visit the project to-do page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to discussions.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

Contents

[edit] Jericho's involvement?

Shouldn't Jericho's interference be acknowledged? As him acting to want to help HBK, did cause Shawn to take more damage from Batista. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chuubii (talk • contribs) 19:39, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] extreme rules

is it true that all these matches are going to be extreme rules. im guessing no cos its not on wwe.com but id thought id just check that it was just a rumor.Black6989 (talk) 00:50, 19 May 2008 (UTC)Black6989

This is the fourth PPV for One Night Stand and every One Night Stand PPV before it was contested under extreme rules. All of the matches in the third One Night Stand had titles such as Stretcher, Street Fight, Cage, etc. where as the first two One Nigh Stands matches did not have titles in its matches but were in fact contested under extreme rules. So I would be 99.99999999...% sure that this One Night Stand would be contested under extreme rules as well. I say 99.99999999...% because until the WWE announces the matches for this PPV, which would probably start on tomorrow's episode of WWE Monday Night RAW, I cannot be 100%. I will be 100% when matches start being announced. Gibsonj338 (talk) 01:06, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Singapore cane match

In no were does it say that this match will be an object on a pole match so why does everybody keep writing that this will be on a pole so I am telling whoever blocked the page to change it into a five-way singapore cane match

Here it states

In the match, a Singapore cane will be available for any of the participants to use, should they get their hands on one. Whoever is able to retrieve the weapon first will be able to clobber his opponents with it., thus being the first to retrieve it off the pole. So it will remain as it is in the article. Also, 5-Way is not a proper way to describe the match.--SRX 02:39, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Listen SRX, in no were in that description does it mention the word pole so i don't know were you get the idea that it will be an object on a pole match if it does not mention the word pole so you should just write singapore cane match and stop messing with th description —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.237.193.61 (talk) 18:56, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Thank you to whoever changed this match —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.203.235.193 (talk) 22:54, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] HBK Vs Jericho or Batista

Can we add that match because it has been offically announced on wwe.com in the last hourDeadman lastride666 (talk) 20:50, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

I have properly added it. –LAX 20:53, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Jeff Hardy V. Umaga

We dont have a history listed for the falls count anywhere match. I would add it but i can't edit wiki's very well, they have been feuding for a long time, with both winning the intercontental title from each other. This ppv's match is brought on by the double count out at the may 19 raw. Never doubt that a group of commited people can change the world, indeed it is the only thing that ever has. (talk) 12:41, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

That's because the feud hasn't excalated that much yet, until it does, it will be added in the background section.--SRX 14:15, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Raw Event

Why is there so many Raw matches. I thought this was a tribranded ppv. It seems that Raw get all the matches. With up 2 3 matches for ECW and SmackDown put together —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.99.46.92 (talk) 18:12, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

That's just the way the event is being booked, and we have no control over that. Also, I hate to sound rude, but you might want to discuss such things on a message board. :) This space is for the improvement of the article.  Hazardous Matt  18:20, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Theme Song

Does anyone know the Theme Song for One Night Stand (2008)? "Hell Yeah" by Rev Theory -GuffasBorgz7- 11:51, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Undertaker vs Edge

Can somebody add the undertaker vs edge TLC match. If undertaker loses, he will be fired. 66.184.196.251 (talk) 12:48, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Is there a reliable source, such as a WWE Broadcast or WWE.com announcing the match? If so, it can be added. If not, it will have to wait until it's confirmed.  Hazardous Matt  13:18, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

On Smackdown. 66.184.196.251 (talk) 13:49, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

If these are taping spoilers we can't use them, they're not reliable.  Hazardous Matt  13:59, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

How can Smackdown tapings be unreliable if people saw them with their own eyes? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.167.5.71 (talk) 14:39, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

That match is most likely going to happen knowing Vicki Guerrero. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.167.5.71 (talk) 14:43, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Please read the Backlash Talk so you can see this is something we go through every month for every pay-per-view. Reports from an unaired event by a spectator are not reliable. I could say I went to the Smackdown taping and Mick Foley beat Edge and Undertaker for the vacant championship, it doesn't make it true, but it has the exact same amount of credibility. We need a reliable source like WWE.com or a public airing of Smackdown. As Smackdown is edited, the final product can always differ from what was recorded. Sit tight, wait for a relaible source, and then it will be added. The article is not going anywhere.  Hazardous Matt  14:51, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

You're proving my point because those reports turned out to be true. Just like this one will turn out to be true when you watch it tomorrow. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.167.5.71 (talk) 14:54, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Okay, 1) Please start signing your posts. It's becoming aggravating to respond to you and discovering I have to re-write an entire paragraph because SineBot had to put in four tildes. Please, sign your posts. 2) No, I didn't prove your point. I presented an argument against your point. Smackdown is edited, so the final product may not be what the live audience saw. Furthermore, the accuracy of the report cannot be confirmed. A report from "some guy at a show" is not reliable. It will be added when it's confirmed, not before.  Hazardous Matt  14:58, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

1) Don't tell me what to do. 2) Smackdown is not edited to the point where it is a completely different show from what the audience saw, it only really edits cuss words and stuff like that so your arguement isn't valid. 3) Sure some guys report could possibly be wrong but why would he waste his breath, and furthermore probablity is on my side considering every report has been true. 68.167.5.71 (talk) 16:20, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

1) Thank you for signing your post. 2) Smackdown is edited, sometimes match endings are even re-taped. That in itself makes the justification for waiting for an official broadcast or acknowledgement on WWE.com reasonable. 3) The reason we do not take the word of a spectator as trustworthy, despite the legitimacy of past reports, is because the information is not coming from a reliable source. That's it. If you don't agree with that, you need to address this with WP:PW. I don't see a point in going around in circles like this.  Hazardous Matt  16:34, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

I don't care about that. I am actually tired of you guys questioning what people saw with their own eyes. You guys can add the match whenever feel like it doesn't break or make my day. But stop questioning what people say unless it can be proved that it isn't true. 68.167.5.71 (talk) 16:37, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

WP Policy states that all information must come from a reliable source. "I saw it" constitutes OR, which is not permitted. I am not the one who needs to bring a source saying that what this person saw did not happen, it is that person's responsibility to provide a reliable source that confirms it did.  Hazardous Matt  16:39, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

My point is you can't prove what he saw didn't happen. And he can't provide a source since wwe.com won't post it until after it has aired world wide on Friday. At that point not only will you be wrong but you will have made an ass out of yourself, unless you stop now. Furthermore I will not dignify another response from you. So Good Day. 68.167.5.71 (talk) 16:44, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Firstly, please remain civil when having a discussion. Second, please re-read my post saying it is not my responsibility to prove this spectator is wrong, but his responsibility to provide a source verifying his findings. Third, please quote where I said the information was incorrect. I was not saying the information was not correct, I was trying to explain to you why it was not from a reliable source and did not qualify to be included. If you do not want to dignify another response from me, that is fine, but please read up on Wikipedia policy so this issue can be averted in the future. Thanks.  Hazardous Matt  16:47, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

It doesn't matter this page isn't for reports anyways that's what the freaking article is for. This page is for the discussion of the article. Hopefully this won't happen again at Night of Champions. 68.167.5.71 (talk) 16:55, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Correct, this page is for the discussion of the article. That's what we've been doing this whole time, discussing information that you wanted to have added to the article. And this sort of situation happens on every PPV page, usually every month. That's what I was trying to explain the policies used for verifying information, so we, at least the two of us, could avoid this in a month, and wherein you might be able to further educate someone else with Wikipedia policy as well. We'll add whatever information is confirmed on Friday, that's basically it.  Hazardous Matt  17:01, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
Bottom line, the match has not been announced on WWE TV or WWE.com, thus it will not be added.--SRX 19:46, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
and i asked this question on every ppv-talkpage this year and it still remains unanswered. why is it Original Research (as Matt said before) when someone watches the event live, but it is not when he watches it on tv? both times, it is just someone saying he saw it. both times without a visible source. maybe i get an answer this time. Diivoo (talk) 17:25, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
just like i thought. again, everyone is quiet. pretty interesting that no one knows an answer... Diivoo (talk) 15:45, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
Actually, when somebody goes to a live event, thats one person. One person is original research, but when it airs on TV, everybody on Earth can see it and it becomes a fact. If the one person at the event saw it, and reported something false, we would be giving out false information, which can't happen. King iMatthew 2008 16:09, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
Actually, a live event is often not held in front of a single person, but in front of about 7000 or 8000. sure, when it airs in australia, it airs in front of more people. but again, its just one or two guys living there, telling us what happened. and thats reliable? in my oppinion, not really... Diivoo (talk) 17:08, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
The point is that the thousand+ people at an event don't all run home and send in SD! results to spoiler sites. One or two do. If we had 8000 identical reports, I think those eyewitnesses would qualify as reliable. What reason would 8000 people have to lie? Gavyn Sykes (talk) 17:34, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
And the thousand+ australians do so? Diivoo (talk) 19:51, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Could we please stop talking about this. When Smackdown shows, we will know if this match is happening or not (most likely will). 76.110.82.251 (talk) 20:45, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

I saw it with my own eyes and heard it, Undertaker VS Edge in Chairs and Ladders Match, If undertaker loses, he will be fired. Plus Vickie Guerrero just announced it today.--24.224.154.249 (talk) 22:37, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Kayfabe

How do we know that The Undertaker will be kayfabe fired? There has been a rumor and I know it is only a rumor that he has been wanting to retire. How do we know this might be for real?--WillC (talk) 00:10, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Exactly, a rumour is what it is. And if this was indeed his last match then him being "fired" by Vickie would still be kayfabe because in reality he would have, I'm assuming, chose to leave and therefore if he was "fired" and was never seen again, it would still be kayfabe. Mark handscombe (talk) 16:04, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
Besides, it's most likely one of those: I buried the Undertaker!, 3 weeks later, bell gongs, match is made, 'Taker wins type of thing. Besides he can't leave his streak at 16-0.SimonKSK 16:51, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

I heard it on Last nights Smackdown, and saw it. So i guess it aint a rumor. Because Vickie wants Edge to win the Championship and not the undertaker.--Pookeo9 (talk) 19:44, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Yes but it is kayfabe. Plus, how many times has the Undertaker been "fired" or "killed"...a lot. Mark handscombe (talk) 09:37, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
Well from what I remember he has never been fired besides that time that he was injured and he supposedly quit. He has died and came back around 4 to 6 times from what I remember. But that is besides the point. This topic is really useless because we do know he is probably going to win. I made the topic because this could be true and was wondering how do we know it is kayfabe. The Ric Flair thing seemed kayfabe for a second. Maybe this is actually true, is what I'm getting at here.--WillC (talk) 09:53, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
Yes but Flair obviously chose to retire, so to make it into a story line they gave him the "next time you lose you're fired" angle. Mark handscombe (talk) 10:19, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Anyone who saw the HOF ceremony or saw Raw 6 days before WM24 knew that Flair would be retiring. He made it so obvious. -GuffasBorgz7- 20:45, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

In any case, Undertaker being "kayfabed fired" is still accurate. Even if he was planning on retiring (which he isn't) him being fired for losing a match is still a storyline. It's not as though the WWE is actually going to fire him if doesn't win his match at the PPV. If he does lose (which he won't) it's probably just to take time off.. much like William Regal being fired, but only for 60 days apparently since that's the length of his real life suspension.--preceded unsigned comment by 12.145.220.220 talk

That Is actually true, Undertaker is actually planning on taking a leave of absence (i'm assuming to spend some time with Family) go it from PWI and they are 99% accurate in their reports, he's more than likely going to come back (bar any special circumstances) just the question WHICH Undertaker will he come back as.RIPped (talk) 03:12, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Hopefully biker (ABA) persona. 76.110.82.251 (talk) 21:20, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Undertaker Will Win

I think it is a foregone conclusion, given the fact that the WWE Night of Champions Poster, shows Undertaker as the World Heavyweight Champion.--Subman758 (talk) 02:12, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Posters mean nothing. Kane was on the 2007 Judgment Day Poster and was only in a dark match. Gavyn Sykes (talk) 02:25, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

And Rey was on the Great American Bash 2007 poster and wasn't there. And he was on the Royal Rumble poster but didn't compete in that match. WeLsHy (talk) 02:37, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Well you were obviously wrong Subman. Hiphopchamp 22:22, 1 June 2008 (UTC)Subscript text —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.96.33.5 (talk)

Undertaker lost. 76.110.82.251 (talk) 11:24, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Please

Semi-protect this page. I don't know how to request for it myself... but as can be plainly seen, it's getting @^#%ed up. 3pointswish (talk) 02:43, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

It's probably some douche bag who can't get their own way when it comes to changign something so they're messing the page up coz they think they're "cool". WeLsHy (talk) 02:44, 2 June 2008 (UTC)


I laughed my fucking ass off when I read that Chris Jericho interfered "on" Shawn Michaels and sucked it hard. That was just great. I love immature humor AndarielHalo (talk) 02:57, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Title name

I think this article should be renamed One Night Stand:Extreme Rules because that is the name it was promoted under just like Vengeance:Night of Champions, comments?--SRX--LatinoHeat 14:42, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

No, because this event was also used before as a PPV, without the Extreme Rules part. It's just like with Over the Edge (1998), which you said had to stay named that way even though it was also promoted as Over the Edge: In Your House. --Andresg770 (talk) 17:13, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
OTE could also be renamed, but you were the only one supporting the move.--SRX--LatinoHeat 21:12, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Match times

As I did with Judgment Day, I have added the match times into the article. There's the source: [1]. 411mania is listed on WP:PW as being reliable Mark handscombe (talk) 16:54, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

I added the ref to the article. ♥Nici♥Vampire♥Heart♥ 17:01, 2 June 2008 (UTC)


[edit] I Quit Background

Is there any reason why the background I wrote for the 'I Quit' Match has been entirely deleted? If it was unconcisely worded or incorrect I'd understand it being edited but why removed altogether? Tony2Times (talk) 01:01, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Event section

I've added it,feel free to edit it,but please don't delete it,thanks. Miroa12004 (talk) 08:16, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Hmm. That could probably be trimmed down quite a bit.  Hazardous Matt  17:59, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
That could be trimmed down a lot! It's a nice job, but 4 paragraphs for one match (HBK vs. Batista) is a little excessive, considering that there's usually only one. ♥Nici♥Vampire♥Heart♥ 19:05, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
And I hate to harp on this, but we need to steer away from comments like "Adamle is gold" for the sake of NPOV  Hazardous Matt  19:28, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
Shouldn't the event section be under the report section, not outside it? -GuffasBorgz7- 09:23, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

I did a few quick Google searches and the Events seems to be play-by-play from a variety of sites, but word-for-word for each match. I'm assuming we have some sort of guideline or policy against that.  Hazardous Matt  13:10, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

I couldn't look further due to work-related restrictions, but here are the websites where the results turned up:

If they're taken word-for-word from these locations, we'd need to at least source them, correct?  Hazardous Matt  13:16, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Preferably we would alter the wording to avoid plagiarism and then source it. Gavyn Sykes (talk) 16:21, 4 June 2008 (UTC)