Talk:Professional wrestling aerial techniques

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

WikiProject Professional wrestling
Professional wrestling
Portal
Professional wrestling aerial techniques 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.
High This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale.
Articles for deletion This article was nominated for deletion in the past. The result of the discussion was Keep.
— Anthøny 20:21, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Shooting Star Piledriver

Removed this section entirely. Just because it was done once in the history of pro wrestling doesn't mean it should have its own section.BooyakaDell 05:08, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

wrong... it states that different moves are hit but the name comes from the one instance where it was infact not intended... other ppl that use the actual move include MDogg20.---Paulley
M-Dogg 20 has done a Shooting Star Piledriver 0 times in his career. He has also attempted a Shooting Star Piledriver 0 times in his career. If he has done a Shooting Star DDT and others have as well, then call the section Shooting Star DDT, not Shooting Star Piledriver.BooyakaDell 20:22, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
yes but it would be pointless to make seperate sections for it... it got the name from a famous incident the fact is the links states he does the DDT (as it reads "Shooting star piledriver|Shooting star DDT") and the actual section acknowledges the fact that the move is used more with the other veriaties of taketown... anyway thats not the point.. as you remove all varitions of the move from this article without reason so stop it --- Paulley --- You could have changed the name to "Shooting star takedown" and re-wrote the description abit to fit the new title and changed the corresponding links to it but no you instantly ecide to delete the whole section and i bet you didnt even go around removing the links... so unless you plan to edit properly dont go round deleting sections.


Phoenix Hoodoo changed the "diving elbow drop" section to include the most famous performer of the move (and some argue the innovator of the same) "Macho Man" Randy Savage

[edit] Why

is one questioning the deletion of the moves pages--Cowboy From Hell 21:40, 20 January 2007 (UTC)DJ BatWave

Lack of sources, mostly.«»bd(talk stalk) 21:54, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

The Senton Bomb definition states that a competitor rotates 270 degrees before landing on his opponent. If that is correct, what was the move used by Dick Togo of Kaientai? He would stand on either the top or middle rope and jump off, but he would extend his legs out front of him to land with his back on the opponent's torso.

I always considered the rotation to make it a Swanton Bomb if it was high-angled like Jeff Hardy or a Cannonball if performed like Jean Pierre Lafitte back in 1995. --pud--11:02--02/06/07

Homicide used Dick Togo's move to finish Shark Boy in a tag team match pitting LAX versus Shark Boy and Norman Smiley on Impact! Mike Tenay referred to the move as a "senton back splash."

 --pud--11:06--02/22/07

[edit] Stratusphere/Stratus Fear

The StratusFear on Trish's website was a typo or what have you. Stratusphere is the correct name for the maneuver. It's been called that in the WWE licensed Smackdown vs. RAW and Smackdown video games for over three years now. The name is play on the stratosphere layer of Earth's atmosphere. The Humanoid Typhoon 17:48, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

The games are not and never have been a trusted source. It's listed multiple times on her official website as StratusFear.«»bd(talk stalk) 17:55, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
We dont use WWE Video games as a reliable source.. many of the names on there are misspelled or adapted on purpous due to liscencing laws they cant put correct naming conventions on most moves.. This Trish website in the other hand is a reliable source and unless revealed by the website as a mistake we must assume they are correct -- Paulley
It sounds better as Stratusphere not Stratus Fear. Mr. C.C. 06:26, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Senton

The source provided says:

My Swanton Bomb was inspired by the Japanese wrestler, the Great Sasuke. I was so impressed with the gracefulness of his Senton Somersault I'd wonder "What makes it look so pretty?" I started watching the tapes in slow-mo and I saw how he would arch his back and hold his head up as he jumped off the top. I started practicing it on the trampoline and that's where it came from. I remember when I told Kevin Kelly about changing the name from Senton to Swanton, "I just wanted to put a little twist on it" I told him. "I don't know" he said. "That sounds kind of weak". Now everybody calls it the Swanton. The word has fully entered into wrestling terminology.

That does not source what the article says, and has been removed. One Night In Hackney303 21:06, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

I was sourcing this part of the sentence: "A variant of the senton bomb, popularized by Jeff Hardy who dubbed it the Swanton Bomb...", for which it does provide evidence. Nikki311 04:36, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

I divided the sentence into two separate sentences now. The reference applies to the sentence: The move was popularized by Jeff Hardy, who dubbed it the Swanton Bomb. The source states that he changed the name ("changing the name from Senton to Swanton") and popularized it ("Now everybody calls it the Swanton"). Nikki311 04:52, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
I've added a cite to the earlier part then, to avoid confusion. One Night In Hackney303 07:22, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Protecting the page

I put a protect on the page because there has been a lot of vandalism lately. Especially with the pending AFD, the last thing that the article needs is unregistered or newly registered users adding nonsense, non-notable info, and vandalism. Nikki311 20:17, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

I don't fault your rationale, but only administrators can protect pages (WP:RFP). McPhail 20:41, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Original research

Anything not sourced within one week will be removed, in line with non-negotiable Wikipedia policies. Thanks. One Night In Hackney303 18:03, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

  • Considering this had won through an Afd process twice, and there are people actively working on sourcing this article, I think you should have a little more patience and civility and let those editors see the process through. Granted, the info isn't "lost," but I know from personal experience that it makes it very difficult and time consuming to go back, pull up the info, try to find a source, and then go add it back in. Yes, one could use their sandbox, but after they are done they then have to go through the article they did in their sandbox and try to make all the changes in it that were made in the real article in the mean time...which is a real pain in the butt. Just give the people time (and no, a week is not enough time). - T-75|talk|contribs 16:18, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
Not a chance. There's been little improvement since the second AfD, and the same thing happened after the first AfD. Source it, or lose it. One Night In Hackney303 16:20, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
Well, you lost the Afd, and you are ignoring the fact that WP:IAR is a policy (yes a policy, not a guideline), and that the WP:IAR policy is very fitting in this circumstance. Additionally, there were points brought up in the Afd discussion that addressed the concern about original research that were never addressed by yourself or others that wanted to see it gone. - T-75|talk|contribs 16:27, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
The AfD is irrelevant. Bring the content of this article in line with Wikipedia policies, or I will. I'm given it ample time since the AfD, and I've even been generous enough to give you advance notice of my intentions. You can claim it isn't OR as much as you want, it is and I have admin backing that it is. Sort the article, end of discussion. One Night In Hackney303 16:30, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
Admin backing...hmm...how does an admin go against policy...interesting.... - T-75|talk|contribs 16:48, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
WP:V and WP:OR are policy. You can cry and stamp your feet like a spoilt child and scream "IAR" every time someone says something you don't like as much as you want, or you can source the article. One Night In Hackney303 16:51, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
You know what, I was hoping that you would have a bit of a sense of decency and civility in how you would respond, but I was wrong (and I should have known better). As much as you dislike it, WP:IAR is also policy, and policy needs to be followed, and IAR applies in this case. You can't pick and choose policies so that they fit your goals. - T-75|talk|contribs 17:05, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
"You can't pick and choose policies so that they fit your goals" - please bring this article in line with WP:V and WP:OR as requested then. One Night In Hackney303 17:08, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
I'm glad you read what I said, now you need to understand that that WP:IAR is a policy at this point because removal of information from this article will hinder wikipedia as a whole because it will make other wrestling related articles difficult to understand...but it's obvious you don't care and that discussing anything with you is hopeless. - T-75|talk|contribs 17:32, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
Uh, no. I'll be glad to post a link to the version before I remove all the unsourced information. History has shown it won't get sourced otherwise, so I'm removing it. Instead of arguing you might want to try sourcing the article, something you've failed to do since the AfD. You want it, you source it, simple as that. One Night In Hackney303 17:35, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
Oh, I'll make sure it's sourced...though I'm sure you won't like how I do it. As I had said, I had hoped you had some civility in you and would actually work with the project but I guess I had too high of expectations for you. - T-75|talk|contribs 17:55, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
I am working with you, you got a week's notice. Seeing as you're unhappy about it, next time I'll do it without warning. One Night In Hackney303 18:01, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Ok

Theo.. I can understand your frustration here, trust me, I do. This is the kind of article where it would be very hard to find WP:RS, because well, it's wrestling. There's not many RS for this kind of thing. But ONiH does have a point. The onus is on the person adding the material to make sure it complies with Wikipedia's policies.. not the person removing the material. If you want, I will post something on 3rd Opinion to get it looked at, but I'm 99% sure that they'll say the same thing that I am. WP:IAR is an important part of Wikipedia, but that cannot trump Verifiability and No Original Research. SirFozzie 17:48, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Based on previous history, it won't get sourced. I didn't immediately remove information after the second AfD, but little headway has been made. WP:V and WP:OR are not negotiable. One Night In Hackney303 17:56, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
It should also be noted that some of those references source multiple sentences. I've added several references since the last AfD. Two to note: #11 sources three sentences, and #17 sources two. So in actuality, those five refs that have been added cover more ground than you are making it sound. Nikki311 18:01, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
My point remains the same. Every time it's block voting from members of the WikiProject, most of whom then do nothing to fix the problems with the article. I appreciate the improvements you have made, but enough is enough. One Night In Hackney303 18:03, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
Since, I'm clearly going to lose this battle...can you please provide the link (like you mentioned above) to the current version of the article (at the time it is deleted) on the talk page, so I can continue to add references when I find a good source? Nikki311 18:06, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
We'll have a few hundred more references up there by the end of the day Nikki. Only info that is likely to be challenged has to footnoted. - T-75|talk|contribs 18:37, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
Everything has been challenged. And primary sources aren't acceptable either. One Night In Hackney303 18:39, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
How in the freakin world can you challenge every sentence in an article. The sources will be there...look it up in the source. The description of a wrestling move is not likely to be challenged unless someone is describing it in a way that is describing a completely different move. - T-75|talk|contribs 18:44, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
As above, everything has been challenged per policy WP:V. One Night In Hackney303 18:46, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
Ok, I respect the fact that the article needs to have sources. I even respect the fact that you are trying to get it into compliance. But to say that you are challenging every single sentence in the article, thus requiring footnotes for every sentence, makes absolutely no sense, goes completely against the intents of the policies of wikipedia, and well....I'm not going to say what it is being. - T-75|talk|contribs 19:20, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
I'm not necessarily saying every sentence has to be sourced. The point I'm making is that everything should be sourced where possible, so if you assume everything needs sourcing and work to that aim accordingly. Then when the week is up, depending on what progress has been made, we can see where we go from there. One Night In Hackney303 19:30, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
I was planning to, as I said in the above section. Also bear in mind that there are many other articles in a similar state, which I've no plans on touching at this moment as I realise you can't be expected to do everything at once. One Night In Hackney303 18:08, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WWF RAW's As Sources?

Is that really worth having? If it doesn't source something specifically, than I am in favor of it being deleted. Mr. C.C. 06:05, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The Big Debate

[edit] Blanking

I did not mean to blank the whole page, I only meant to undo the most recent edit. Now whenever I try to revert it back, nothing happens and it just stays blank. This is very bizarre.

Blanking a page is seen as an act of vandalism, especially when you have no contributions. The edit I made stands, due to the extensive and reputable sources, including IMDb.com and interviews with/on the wrestler himself. My edit is well researched, and therefore well sourced. The move was created by Brimstone. CIMA may have popularized a move called an Iconoclasm, but he did not create it. Also, please be sure to sign your posts in the future. WrestlefnLI 19:55, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

As stated, the sources you cited are not reliable. An interview with the wrestler is not reliable because a wrestler is bound to claim to have made up moves because that makes them sound special. You also cited Wikipedia itself, which is not a valid source for Wikipedia articles, period. IMDB is not a reliable source because it was written by a fan. The entry is written by an anonymous person whose name is nowhere to be found. The other two sources you cited have to do with Mayan culture, which without validation that the move was named after Mayan culture, have no place in the article. The move name is an Iconoclasm. Brimstone's article reflects that he calls it XiBalba. I would be happy to let the XiBalba edit stay, but such a substantial change needs review from other wrestling fans. Also, your edit summary indicates that you did not inspect my edit summary at all.

Please stop trying to incite an editing war. I would recommend that prior to jumping to conclusions, you research the rules & regulations of Wikipedia. Wikipedia appreciates your contributions, although you must play by the rules. The change was made to the Iconoclasm because the wrestler CIMA did not create the move, he uses a variation of a move called XiBalba that was created prior by the wrestler Brimstone. After researching this subject, I found more than enough sources to back up this claim with none to disprove it. The IMDb is one of the most reputable sources on the internet, and a confirmation claiming the move was invented by him from the wrestler himself via interviews on the internet, print, and radio pretty much sums it up. So while Wikipedia appreciates your contributions... all claims must be well researched as per the no original research policy. Wiki reference was to reference the name of XiBalba itself, until you have reliable references to state otherwise, please do not revert again. You are new to WP, and I can appreciate your enthusiasm, although you are going about it the wrong way. Again, please be sure to sign your comments. WrestlefnLI 20:26, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
Also note that as YOU said, "An interview with the wrestler is not reliable because a wrestler is bound to claim to have made up moves because that makes them sound special". Therefore making any interview a non-reliable source. While Brimstone seems to have an abundant amount of sources to prove this, CIMA has none but one reference to what appears to be a fan page, leaving me to ask how can that be reliable information? So how can YOU be sure of who created what? The fact that you have no prior contributions does not make you a reliable judge. WrestlefnLI 20:35, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

I never claimed that CIMA invented the move.

This is an impartial third opinion...IMDB is not a reliable source and should never be used to cite information because anybody can edit it...the same goes for citing Wikipedia. While primary sources like interviews, wrestlers' websites, etc. can be used...secondary sources are much preferred (check WP:RS). Nikki311 20:32, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
Timber99, In your latest undo you have stated "The sources are unreliable. You have not tried to show why they are not unreliable. I am not saying the edit disappears. I am saying let people discuss it. Also don't attack me." No one is attacking you. You have not shown why these sources are unreliable, nor have you shown why the one source listed for Iconoclasm IS reliable, therefore you have not shown validity of the article before I made my original edit. User Nikki311 has made a point in stating that interviews as well as wrestlers' website can be used to source information since it is a primary source. Also, one of the references is from wrestling publication "Wrestling: Then & Now", which states that Brimstone created the move. And, as per your latest comment on this talk page you are "not claiming that CIMA invented the move", makes me wonder as to what you are starting a fight for? WrestlefnLI 20:54, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
Fixed it, I removed the unreliable/unneeded references. WrestlefnLI 21:21, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

You did not quote Nikki311 accurately. She said that "primary sources like interviews, wrestlers' websites, etc. can be used" but sources independent of the subject are preferred. Again, just because a wrestler says he made up a move does not mean he did. You have not addressed it. You are not addressing it. You need sources independent of the wrestler. Sources which are not affiliated with the wrestler. You are using interviews, whose information comes from the wrestler themselves. What Nikki311 is saying (I think) is that sources affiliated with the wrestler are fine to further substantiate info...as long as the info has already been substantiated. Once the info has been substantiated, THEN that wrestler web sites and such can be used as backup sources. This info has not been substantiated. Again, I reiterate: This is a major change. It needs discussion before being made. I can say that I invented the Shooting Star Press. That doesn't make it true. Again, lets get some discussion going.

Yes, you did attack me by twice accusing me of trying to start an edit war. That is an attack.

[edit] Reasoning Behind Iconoclasm Change to XiBalba

As per the request of Timber99, as follows will be the argument and reasoning behind the change of the Iconoclasm to the XiBalba. The origin of the move is obviously the question in this matter. The wrestler CIMA who uses the version of the move as an Iconoclasm, or Goriconoclasm has never stated that he created the move; nor are there any sources stating that he is the creator of the move. The site states that the Iconoclasm is one of CIMA’s trademark moves, although a trademark move is a move a wrestler may perform, however did not necessarily create. However, he was the wrestler that was put down originally as the creator on WP without any source other than a fan site that is shown below again stating only that CIMA uses this move:

  • http://dgusa.puroresufan.com/typhoon.html the Puroresu fan site states as follows: “Iconoclasm: Flipping slam from the corner. Has a cross arm version called the Goriconoslasm. Name comes from a BUCK-TICK song. The CIMA full course is completed if followed by.....”

The sources that I have used for the wrestler Brimstone however show that Brimstone lays claim to the move calling it XiBalba (Entrance to Hell). The fact that he states it in numerous interviews stemming from print, radio, and internet clearly should prove that he is the creator of the actual move itself. The excerpts are as follows:

What is your favorite move? Did you create it, and if so what was your inspiration?

My favorite move is XiBalba (The Entrance to Hell). I created the move years ago because I felt that my original finisher, a Bezerker Bomb, was too boring to be my finishing move. I still use the Bezerker, but during the match as opposed to completing the match. I’m not typically a high flyer although I do hit a top rope elbow from time to time. However I always seem to be surrounded by them! I felt I needed to do something impressive to compete with moonsaults, and triple corkscrew whatever’s! I wanted to show power, intimidation, and athleticism. I worked on XiBalba creating many variations, and eventually came up with the final version where I seat my opponent up in the corner on the top turnbuckle, grab their wrists, twist my body (so my back is towards them and their arms become crossed), then I throw the opponent over my body (into a monkey flip) while I sit out into a pin. I have noticed that other workers started using my move, and different variations as well. But I still did it first, and I do it the best!

  • In an interview excerpt with Brimstone on "The Warned":

http://www.warned.net/InterviewBrimstone.html

What holds and moves is Brimstone best known for?

"My finisher is a fan favorite… it’s a move I created called XiBalba (Entrance to Hell), and normally when I set my opponent up for it the crowd gets amped! I do a double chokeslam sit out bomb called the Smoke Bomb, a spear called the Attitude Adjustment, and a mean wheelbarrow german suplex called Hell’s Bells."

  • An excerpt from an article written on Brimstone in the Publication – “Wrestling Then & Now” stating that Brimstone created the move:

"…The match consisted of almost every move I remembered so vividly… the “Smoke Bomb,” a double chokeslam sit out bomb; “Hell's Bells,” an awe inspiring wheelbarrow german suplex; the “Attitude Adjustment,” a devastating spear; and then the finish with “XiBalba (Entrance to Hell),” a maneuver that Brim created in his early years (that is still a crowd pleaser to this day)…."

And lastly, in an interview with Brimstone on "Trash Talking Radio" at www.trashtalkingradio.com , Brimstone clearly states that he created the move (you can find the archive in the 2007 section).

Finally, Brimstone’s debut was a year prior to CIMA’s in which would lead me to believe that chances are, along with the proof, that Brimstone is the founder of the move. This is not a widely used move such as a Piledriver, or even a Sharpshooter where the person who used it first is easily recognized. Furthermore, there is not even a single reference on CIMA stating that he had anything to do with creating the move. Not to mention that popularizing a move is extremely different than creating it. I feel that due to the fact that I have more than explained the reasoning for the edit, and showed reliability… that my edit should stand.WrestlefnLI 18:28, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Hi WrestlefnLI. The biggest problem here more than anything else is that u are refusing to address anything that I am stating. U are telling me things that have nothing to do with anything that I have said, and u have not made an attempt to address any of my concerns. Until u do that, it is difficult to come to an agreement. I have never argued that Brimstone did or did not create the move. I have never argued that CIMA did or did not create the move. U are arguing that I am arguing that CIMA created the move. This is not true! U really are putting words in my mouth by misquoting stuff that i have never said. I dont mean to be impolite here.

My concern is as follows, and I have stated it at least three times before now without it being addressed. The sources you are citing are NOT reliable. Just because a wrestler says something in an interview that speaks positively of him or herself does not mean it is true. These interviews with Brimstone are just that...interviews, and interviews are not reliable sources BY THEMSELVES! I myself can train to be a wrestler, have a few matches, and then do interviews and claim to have invented the Shooting Star Press. That does not mean I invented it.

Not only are these interviews unreliable, but the interviews are found on unreliable web sites! Warned.net, popstarsplus.com, and imdb are not a reliable source.

Not a single time have you addressed this concern after I brought it up at least three times (and I think it was more like 5 or six).

That being said, I am going to try to end this once and for all by making a compromise. I am willing to have you it say that Brimstone is one of the most well known users of this move and that he calls the move the XiBalba (entrance to hell) in the article. I suggest that we call the section "Iconoclasm" because that is what the move is most well known as. Every other wrestler who uses it calls it an Iconoclasm. How does that sound? I will edit the article right now to fit this compromise and let me know what you think. This really is as good as I can do without you addressing any of my points.

lets work together to improve this article. - Timber99 - Timber99 21:51, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Hey WrestlefnLI, rather than changing it now, tell me if the compromise i have stated is agreeable because i would rather not edit the whole paragrpah and then have it just changed back. Does what I said sound ok? thnks - Timber99 - Timber99 21:57, 30 July 2007 (UTC) Basically the only thing I am saying I want is 1. the heading be changed from "Xibalba (Entrance ot hell)" to "Iconoclasm" since I think we can btoh agree that that is what it is most commonly known as and 2. the unreliable sources to be removed. does that sound ok? thx - Timber99 - Timber99 22:03, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

The problem is by calling the move the Iconoclasm, you are technically giving credit to CIMA for creating the move and therefore deeming the move the Iconoclasm. The issue here is deciding which came first, the chicken or the egg. What about this... Leave the Iconoclasm as is, with made popular by CIMA, considering it is an under the arm throw, and XiBalba will stand alone as well because of the difference in the placement of hands/body as made popular by Brimstone, and the Goriconoclasm under XiBalba because the Goriconoclasm is technically a variation of XiBalba. I suppose until further secondary sources are available in either case, we can add the edit in this fashion so that we both agree. Fair enough? Do you want to post your edit on this Talk page first so we can work on it together? WrestlefnLI 22:26, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Also not trying to be rude, but please avoid using WP:Weasel in stating that it is "most commenly known as", there are still no references stating that it is known as the Iconoclasm. You must have references because there are absolutely none for the Iconoclasm, and again the ref used there is a non-reliable fan site. We can agree to disagree if the two stand alone as I suggested. WrestlefnLI 22:32, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Hi wrestlefnli! I agree with a lot of what you said in your latest reply. What I do disagree with unfortunately is XiBalba having its own section, since there is only one wrestler who calls it that and so XiBalba (because only one wrestler calls it that, at least as far as i know) can not be considered a common name.

Do we agree that names on this page should refer to the most name that the move is most commonly known as as far as the wide community of wrestling? - Timber99 - Timber99 22:40, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

I disagree... I feel the names on the page should refer to the actual name of the move not as it is percieved to be commonly known as. The page is actually written to reflect the name of the actual move, and not what it is commonly known as. Similar to "The People's Elbow", it is an Elbow drop. "Old School" should just be a Arm Twist Rope Walk (which it is refered to on WP). These wrestlers popularized the moves (a simple elbow drop or walking the ropes), but did not create them. So again the issue boils down to which came first, the chicken or the egg, which is why I felt that maybe two seperate sections would be appropriate as we do not have the information at this time on either side to prove differently. The same goes for Iconoclasm, only one wrestler CIMA, uses it as far as I have seen. Again, chicken.. egg... WrestlefnLI 22:57, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
The only other thing that I can think of that should be done, is if the move is entered as it's general term and then all three moves can be listed individually under that title. This is the way all the other entries are posted, so I would assume that would be fairest and correct protocal for us to follow. Then after each can state popularized by such and such wrestler. WrestlefnLI 23:12, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Well, thats true, but for every People's Elbow thers tens of moves that are listed by the most popular name. That's why I really think we need more people to talk abotu this, and get a wider viewpoint than just you and me - Timber99 - Timber99 00:31, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Well, Timber99, if you insist! ...I've been watching this edit war "discussion" in the hopes that you two would come to a conclusion on your own, but seeing as that does not seem to be the case, I will be the first to jump in. I feel that you both have valid points about the origins and what-not, but I must say that I agree with WrestlefnLI's latest solution. I feel that for now it seems to be a reasonable solution to end this edit war. Anyone have any better ideas? —Fall Of Darkness 00:52, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

After watching this editing war, I believe that the last solution given by WrestlefanLI makes the most sense. I have a major issue with, and have very little patience for articles on Wiki that are non-sourced or poorly sourced as you can see by my contribs. The fact that there are any references given by WrestlefanLI gives him the fair advantage. Honestly, it seems as though you keep skipping around the fact that there were no proper references prior to this initial edit! I can appreciate your enthusiasm, but I believe that by catagorizing the move "Top Rope Flipping Slam" and adding the two wrestlers in alphabetical order underneath, it would be best and most appropriate. Hellswasteland 00:53, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

You can also bring it up at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Professional wrestling. Personally, I don't have an opinion on the matter...except that I'm glad you've stopped reverting the article back and forth. Both of you came close, or did, violate the Three Revert Rule, which could get you blocked from editing. Be careful about that in the future. Nikki311 00:56, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Here is a source which lists it as an Iconoclasm: http://www.deathvalleydriver.com/bbbowm/part1.htm . No mention of XiBalba. Also no mention of Brimstone in the Users section of this page. Also, it clearly says on this page http://www.deathvalleydriver.com/bbbowm/bbbowm.htm that the process of creating this directory/encyclopedia of wrestling moves involved copyediting, research, and many others by multiple different people, all of whom are mentioned, which indicates that it is a reliable source. Is this not more reliable than an interview? You have a full copyediting and verification process explained. Also, the problem I have with WrestlefnLI's idea is that as far as I understand it is not much of a compromise. What would be the difference from the version he had originally made? I am happy to have it list the XiBalba in the users section, is that unreasonable? - Timber 99 - Timber99 01:53, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

I looked up the earlier versions of your discussion, and noticed the section including your idea of reliable sources. http://www.deathvalleydriver.com is not a reliable source, it is a fan site and nothing more. I would tend to believe an article in published media as a reference as opposed to net babble. Also, it seems as though you are continuing to change the true matter at hand to suit yourself. The move in question is not the Iconoclasm, in retrospect it is the Goriconoclasm. The Goriconoclasm is seemingly the issue due to the fact that it is closely resembling the XiBalba. The Iconoclasm is apparently a different move. As I mentioned prior, it would make the most sense to end this ridiculous debate and put the move up as, "Top Rope Flipping Slam." It is not Wiki like to give other users the wrong impression of a debate. Hellswasteland 02:09, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Deathvalleydriver.com is not an ideal source but it is clearly more reliable than an interview, which shows no indication of the posters of the interview having any sort of verification or fact-checking process. Yes it is in fact more than a fansite because it has a fact-checking process. Also, as I have stated time and time and time and time again, the issue at hand is the reliability of sources. I don't know who you are or why you're mad at me. I have stuck to the same point since the beginning and that is that there needs to be reliable sources, and WrestlefnLI's not responding to my point leads me to believe that he or she agrees that interviews are not reliable sources. I would be happy for the move to be listed as "Top Rope Flipping Slam" and just have the users and variations listed below that, but XiBalba does not deserve in my opinion its own header without independent verification that the name is popularly used.- Timber 99 - Timber99 02:33, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Timber, I have nothing against you at all. WrestlefanLI apparently DID put a reliable source! That is what I have the issue with. Apparently there was an article written about 'Brimstone' in a reputable publication stating that he created the move. Then on top of that, he added the interviews with the wrestler for additional references. You are continuously attacking the validity of WrestlefanLI's references, but with all due respect your references are less than adequate to defend your case being they are both fan-sites, and the other wrestler has nothing stating any claim. Again, if you have no problem with listing it as "Top Rope Flipping Slam", w/users and variations below it; I do not see what else there is to discuss? Just because the XiBalba does not deserve it in your opinion, does not mean that is the common concensus. Hellswasteland 03:01, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
Are we going to be able to resolve this any time soon? I would like to go to sleep sometime tonight. Listen, I'm fine with listing it under that also, obviously with XiBalba having it's own header. I think it would be good like that until when and if either party can find any reliable sources to prove otherwise. If we can agree to this I believe we both win. WrestlefnLI 03:16, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

To Hellswasteland: What "Reputable publication" are u referring to? please be specific

"and the other wrestler has nothing stating any claim" - cima???? ok.......this has nothing to do with anything ive ever stated.

We are looking for reliable sources which show that there is a fact-checking or verification process. right? - Timber99 - Timber99 03:33, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

As far as reputable sources go, it seems as though a printed publication is more reputable that any fan site on the web. I would assume that a printed publication goes through a fact checking or verification process. So YES we are looking for reliable sources. I personaly could care less if the move was created by Santa Claus, I am just trying to adhere to Wiki policy. The fact of the matter is, there is a reference stating the wrestler Cima uses a move called an Iconoclasm; there are references stating the wrestler Brimstone uses a move called XiBalba. There is nothing to reference who created the move, or which came first so the edit should stand as a general move with the variations and users alphabetically underneath. Hellswasteland 03:48, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

"in a reputable publication" - what specifically are u referring to here? thx- Timber99 - Timber99 04:08, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

I am done with this. It is obvious that you have nothing better to do than skip around the true issues. Anyone can plainly see that the name of the publication was included in the convo with WrestlefanLI as well as in WrestlefanLI's explanation. Dealing with you seems to be a waste of time, and it is obvious that you created this account in order to harass. If I am wrong on this, then you will deal with the change humbly, stop being stubborn, and accept the compromise that I am going to offer, and have been offering to end the bickering.

[edit] Top Rope Flipping Slam

The top rope flipping slam sees a wrestler stand under an opponent, who is situated on the top turnbuckle, turn his/her back to this opponent while taking hold of the opponent's arms from below, either holding under at the opponent's arm pits, or crossing the opponent's arms over each other. The wrestler would then throw the opponent forward while falling to a seated position, flipping the opponent over in midair, and slamming them down to the mat back first.

[edit] Fall From Grace

Christopher Daniels uses a variation, which he calls the Fall From Grace, in which Daniels wraps one of the opponent's arms around their own neck and throws them down by the wrapped arm.

[edit] Iconoclasm

This variation sees a wrestler stand under an opponent, who is situated on the top turnbuckle, turn his/her back to this opponent while taking hold of the opponent's arms from below, often holding under at the opponent's arm pits. The wrestler would then throw the opponent forward while falling to a seated position, flipping the opponent over in midair, and slamming them down to the mat back first. The Iconoclasm was popularized by Dragon Gate wrestler, CIMA. [1][2]

[edit] XiBalba (Entrance to Hell)

This variation sees an attacking wrestler place an opponent on the top turnbuckle and, while facing away from the opponent, crossing the opponent's arms over each other then, while still holding onto the arms, flipping the opponent forward over and down to the mat while falling to a sit-out position, normally resulting in a pin. The XiBalba was popularized by wrestler, Brimstone.[3][4][5]

Hellswasteland 04:32, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

You just blew up at me for NO REASON and lambasted me. What is your problem? I asked you an honest question. - Timber99 - Timber99 05:02, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Just to throw this whole thing off track ;) - the way I read the explanation of the move it doesn't actually belong on this page, it's non an "Aerial technique" at all, it's a slam type move or a throw - not an "Aerial technique". Whatever format you guys agree on this isn't actually the page for it you know MPJ-DK 23:44, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Third Party Opinion - Initiated

It seems as though this is no longer a dispute between two individuals. The three editors Timber99, Hellswasteland and WrestlefnLI already throw off the potential tie-breaking edit of a third party opinion, and it seems that there have already been a few third opinions added, notably Nikki311 and Fall Of Darkness. Perhaps this argument is best settled among the five of you, rather than bringing in an additional editor who will, at best, be underinformed about wrestling in general, as well as potentially generate a tie by bringing the number of those involved to 6. Additionally, if it's in mediation, I think it's beyond 3PO. DRosenbach (Talk | Contribs) 01:47, 9 August 2007 (UTC)