Talk:SummerSlam (2007)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 This article is a current featured article candidate. A featured article should exemplify Wikipedia's very best work, and is therefore expected to meet the criteria. Please feel free to leave comments.
After the FAC director promotes the article or archives the nomination, a bot will update the nomination page and article talk page. Do not manually update the {{ArticleHistory}} template when the FAC closes.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the SummerSlam (2007) article.
Article policies
Archives: 1, 2
Good article SummerSlam (2007) has been listed as one of the Everyday life good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can delist it, or ask for a reassessment.
WikiProject Professional wrestling
Professional wrestling
Portal
SummerSlam (2007) 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.
Good article GA This article has been rated as GA-Class on the quality scale.
Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.

Contents

[edit] Report

Hi there, i started to write a detailed report, but because english is not my native language, i guess, i made some grammar/spelling mistakes. so i would appreciate it if someone could read through it and correct my mistakes. I will finish the report tomorrow, maybe you can give me some feedback. Diivoo 21:08, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Diva Battle Royal

The SummerSlam page says: "...William Regal...arranged for a Battle Royal among all WWE Divas..." So should we leave out the individual names? Stormin' Foreman 02:24, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

WWE.com has announced which Divas will participate. If more are announced, they will be added to the article.-- bulletproof 3:16 02:27, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
On the graphic shown towards the end of RAW during the rundown of SummerSlam matches, Kristal was shown as one of the participants. Should she be added now? Or should we just wait until the match happens at this Sunday? Virakhvar321 05:52, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Well, at least we know now Cherry wasnt involved in it. Its just too bad Beth is too strong or else Michelle would've won -ChristoCracker 10:40, 27 August 2007 (UTC) BTW, Michellle's great at Battle royals! she won the memorial day one and she almost won the summerslam one -ChristoCracker 10:40, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

This was the first Summerslam in 7 years to feature a Women's contest. I think that that deserves to be mentioned. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 146.201.182.142 (talk) 21:24, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] MVP vs. Hardy

Hasn't that match been announced for SS yet? --Endlessdan 19:19, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Maybe tonight. TonyFreakinAlmeida 20:25, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

You mean Friday.Wrestlinglover420 21:57, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Mvp vs. Hardy was not announced. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 76.110.82.251 (talk) 22:24, August 22, 2007 (UTC)

  • I heard that they could be teaming up soon, I dunno if now by JBL this past Friday Roxy 00:20, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Kane/Finlay

Just got back from Smackdown event. Kane/Finlay was announced. No MVP/Hardy —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 88.110.43.240 (talk) 15:22, August 22, 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The Boogeyman vs Big Daddy V

This rivalry has been going on for over a month so it still may be added at the last second. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.172.61.190 (talk) 23:28, August 22, 2007 (UTC)

Nope!76.110.82.251 01:59, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Jackass involvement

Shouldn't the cancelled Jackass participation still be noted for historical purposes? Early promitional material featured them. The poster with the cast and Umaga was even shown here until the Triple H one was released, and the brief teaser video ad was aired a few times, and is even on the Vengeance DVD I picked up this week. Sure it didn't happen, but it still noteworthy to document the publicized intention with as much as was promoted: "early promotional materials featured Jackass as being involved with the event in some capacity but was later cancelled before any details aside from their appearing were announced" seems fair to me CyclopsScott 23:48, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

I think it should. Jackass was supposedly the theme to it, but it might not be too relevant to the article though. It, although should be noted in the future trivia section. -- KBW1 05:28, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
I also agree..take this up with an Admin.--Hornetman16 (talk) 10:12, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
No article should have a trivia section, and as for the whole jackass saga I suggest you RTFA. Darrenhusted 13:29, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
Now thats un called for. Aren't these talk pages here to improve articles. What you did was not improvement. -- KBW1 02:43, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
Have you read the archives? If not then it was called for. Darrenhusted 14:39, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
The way he said it was "uncalled for". Have you read the Talk page guidlines? Be polite. -- KBW1 00:05, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
I have to agree that it was pretty rude. If you had said the same thing in a nicer way, then there wouldn't have been any problems, but now there is an offended user, and rightfully so. The civility policy exists for a reason. This is a top ten website, so there will always be people around who aren't aware of past discussions that have taken place about a certain subject. You should get into the habit of dealing with it nicely now, since being nice is more efficient, and if you continue to be impolite, then you will be wasting a bunch of your time, and other people's time in the long run. Peace, The Hybrid 06:18, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
Well said Hybrid. I shouldn't try to let it affect me though. I just don't want to have any problems and I want to try to keep our talk pages in order. Thanks. -- KBW1 05:57, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] jamie noble

vs hornswaggle —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.156.142.218 (talk) 22:19, August 25, 2007 (UTC)

They didn't say that they would wrestle at Summerslam, they just said the match would take place in the future. The Hybrid 22:22, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Dark Match results in

Headline Planet is reporting the dark match results. Should this be added right now???

Lance Cade and Trvor Murdoch def. Paul London and Brian Kendrick gravediggerfuneral

[edit] CM Punk vs John Morrison

Tell me someone did couln't have noticed that. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.138.137.5 (talk) 01:03, August 27, 2007 (UTC)

Notice what? --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 01:37, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Time for Khali/Batista?

SuperSonicTH 03:02, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Trivia

We should add a trivia section, i have the first point! it would be about how HHH and Mysterio won in similar fashion, both their opponents executed their finisher on their challengers but they kicked out of the pin AND well, both returning Superstars won. —Preceding unsigned comment added by ChristoCracker (talk • contribs) 10:45, August 27, 2007 (UTC)

Trivia sections end up filled with fancruft, so i is best to not have them. What you suggested would count as fancruft, so that proves my point. Cheers, The Hybrid 14:19, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Something should be added about Cena receiving one of th worst reactions ever, I mean come on they were asking Orton to break his neck. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.38.10.84 (talk) 15:18, August 27, 2007 (UTC)

Yeah.... That's also not trivia, or even really remotely close to being trivia. TheJudge310 23:10, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
There is info in Cena's article about his signature polarized chants at PPVs, but it doesn't belong in this article. It is notable about Cena, but since this is just another PPV where people hated Cena (like the two preceding WrestleManias) it isn't notable to this article. The Hybrid 01:33, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
What about Jackass? Should not it be noted about how they were formely scheduled to appear? -- KBW1 02:54, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
In the archives there is a discussion showing a consensus to not include the Jackass information. While I personally don't agree with it, a consensus is a consensus :(. Peace, The Hybrid 01:03, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Divas Battle Royal

This was the first Summerslam in 7 years to feature a Women's contest. I think that that deserves to be mentioned.

[edit] austin/mvp

why does it say ""afterwards, austin delivered a stunner to mvp". The contest never even started. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.38.10.84 (talk) 10:59, August 27, 2007 (UTC)

Yup —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.249.87.26 (talk) 12:52, August 27, 2007 (UTC)

your right —Preceding unsigned comment added by MC RIDE (talk • contribs) 17:13, August 27, 2007 (UTC)

The results page on WWE.com lists Steve Austin as defeating MVP. Technically, the contest never happened, and technically it wasn't even a sanctioned competition (there was no referee, and, more importantly, no rules or established way to win), but I think we should go with what WWE.com says, and list it as Austin defeating MVP. Calgary 04:32, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

It was supposed to be a drinking contest and we know the rules (WWE had one before, at SNME with Austin and JBL). However, this one never even started. TJ Spyke 00:19, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Maryse and Cherry

Should we mention they were supposed to compete in the battle royal but never did.Anormalwwefan 19:16, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

No beacuse they were not in the match.

Considering, you present a valid source stating they were supposed to be in the Battle Royal, it's still not notable enough to incldude into the article. -- KBW1 03:19, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Tagline

The tagline for the event was "The Party is Over", as seen on the promotional poster. Just because it wasn't once mentioned on T.V. doesn't mean it's not the tagline. Some examples of this would be Armageddon 2006 and New Year's Revolution 2007, the tagline for Armageddon was "The End...Is Only the Beginning" and the tagline for NYR was "The Revolution Continues...", yet neither of them were once mentioned on T.V.. --  Kip Smithers  23:50, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

No, it was "The Biggest Party of the Summer", which was used every single time Summerslam was advertised [1] --Maestro25 18:38, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
And why can't we just list both? Like on the WrestleMania X page for example Mark handscombe 13:55, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Right well there's been no objection so I'm listing both. Mark handscombe 08:32, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Sounds good to me. The Hybrid 08:38, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Sellout Date

Let's reach a consensus before this gets out of hand, please. Gavyn Sykes 21:42, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

It's not a big deal to me, but selling out in only 40 minutes seems notable to me. TJ Spyke 21:46, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
Hooray! Another edit war involving Monnitewars! It's sourced. It's not a problem. It should stay. GaryColemanFan 22:01, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
Agreed with. KipSmithers T/C 22:08, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
It's trivia and violates WP:TRIVIA.--Monnitewars (talk) 22:10, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
I don't think it counts as trivia. I suggest you don't revert again Monnite, you have reverted 3 times and the next time could result in a temporary block. TJ Spyke 22:28, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
Yeah it does.--Monnitewars (talk) 22:40, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
The least that can be taken out id the 40 minutes part which I'm doing.--Monnitewars (talk) 22:41, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
The selling out in 40 minutes part is the notable part. I hate to say it, but you've violated the 3RR now (partial reverts still count as reverts) since you've reverted 4 times in the last 24 hours in what is clearly a content dispute. TJ Spyke 22:52, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

This asserts the notability of the event, so not only is it not trivia, but it makes this article pass WP:N more soundly. The Hybrid 23:44, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

WP:TRIVIA isn't a hammer you can use to knock your argument home with since it states "avoid creating lists of miscellaneous facts" - this isn't a list of facts, it actually follows the policy and incorporates it into the text and is thus in accordance with all policies and guidelines. So I'd advice you to do two things - read the policy and learn what it actually says before using it as a (failing) argument. MPJ-DK 03:10, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
Not to mention that WP:TRIVIA even says: "This guideline does not suggest removing trivia sections, or moving them to the talk page. - If information is otherwise suitable, it is better that it be poorly presented than not presented at all." and "This guideline does not suggest omitting unimportant material. - This guideline does not attempt to address the issue of what information is included or not — only how it is organized." (not that both apply, just that most people only seem to read the first sentence of that page). TJ Spyke 03:57, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
There is that as well, most people actually miss that one too as they tend to delete even list trivia - so that's a very good point to remember. I think someone is clearly wrong and should leave the article alone. —Preceding unsigned comment added by MPJ-DK (talk • contribs) 07:25, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Removal of Referees?

Why? They are an important part of any match, in kayfabe or not. Gavyn Sykes (talk) 23:07, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Pre-GA review

I looked this over today and it's looking good. There are few things I wanted to mention:

  1. The lead is probably too short. It's supposed to be 2-3 full paragraphs for an article around 30KB, and this article is 46KB.
    Y Done
  2. What is a "Handicap No Disqualifications Champions Only" match? An explanation of what this means would help.
    Y Done
  3. Pectoral muscle could use a wikilink.
    Y Done
  4. "Khali's Punjabi-style celebration" leaves me wanting to know more (ie. what does that mean?). Since an explanation would probably move too far away from the article, "Khali's celebration" might be better. This is just my opinion, though.
    Y Done
  5. "..forcing him to quit after hitting his left knee repeatedly with a steel chair while upside-down on a steel lighting structure" is a little confusing.
    Y Done
  6. I don't watch wrestling, so I'm a little confused. Were Hardy and Porter feuding? The challenges (admittedly, beer drinking and pizza eating don't demonstrate hatred, but they are challenges nonetheless) seem to indicate a rivalry, but they apparently also won the tag team championship at the same time?
    Y Done
  7. Who did The Great Khali attack after the I Quit match on September 7? "He" could refer to either Mysterio or Guerrero.
    Y Done
  8. A reference for Orton interfering on August 27 is needed.
    Y Done
  9. You explain that a title can't change hands by countout or disqualification, but this explanation is given the second time that a champion retains a belt by disqualification. It should be moved to the first time this happens (Khali-Batista).
    Y Done
  10. The last line ("Orton had kicked in his head") doesn't seem right. Should it be "had kicked him in his head"?
    Y Done
  11. Per the discussion on the WP:PW talk page a while back, it's generally preferred to use a word like "performed" rather than "hit" when someone executes a move. This helps to clarify that wrestling is not real and helps avoid the "in universe" problem.
    Y Done

Just a few minor things there, and I think it's looking good for nomination after giving other people a chance to look it over. GaryColemanFan (talk) 21:34, 4 March 2008 (UTC)


  1. One more thing. Every paragraph in the event section is only sourced in the last sentence. Is there are way that the whole paragraph can be sourced? Instead of just the last sentence. Nevermind
  2. I notice that the date and venue is sourced in the infobox, but I believe it should be sourced in the article as well.

That's all that I can think of for now. iMatthew 2008 02:39, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Why would you source the whole paragraph? Would you source every sentence? Also, the date and venue are already sourced in the article. --Cheers, LAX 02:44, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
I didn't mean every sentence. Forget it, I guess. I meant the date and venue should be sourced in the first paragraph, but I guess not either. Forget it too, iMatthew 2008 02:48, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
It is sourced in the first paragraph. Look at this ref. --Cheers, LAX 02:55, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] GA review

GA review (see here for criteria)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose): b (MoS):
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars etc.:
  6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:

Issues:

  • relevance of specific details of the Cena/Carlito match. Information on Orton's involvement is sufficient.
    Orton did nothing really. All he did was come out to the ring and distract Cena. So, IMO, interfered is what should be there. –Cheers, LAX 15:52, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
    What I meant was this is not relevant: "Cena controlled most of the match, performing a variety of moves including a Twisting belly to belly side slam and a Sitout hiptoss." and "after forcing Carlito to submit with the STFU" --13 of Diamonds (talk) 20:44, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
    Well, it was part of the match, so I don't see any reason why it should be removed. –Cheers, LAX 21:01, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
    The paragraph is about the Cena/Orton feud. The match (before the interference) contributed nothing to the feud. --13 of Diamonds (talk) 21:38, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
    Y Done
  • "then-World champion Edge". Introduction of new "World champion" term should be avoided.
    Y Done
    I mean you should not use "World champion" because it could mean something other than the World Heavyweight Championship.
    Y Done
  • "became new World Heavyweight Champion". "the" should be added before "new"
    Y Done
  • "ECW title". Use official name.
    Y Done
  • The two uses of "15 Minutes of Fame match" suggests it might not be the same match.
    Y Done
    Use "the [...] match" instead of "a [...] match" for the second use.
    Y Done
  • The Mysterio/Guerrero paragraph does not mention anything after the I Quit match.
    Y Done
  • Capitalization of maneuvers inconsistencies.
    Y Done
    Still some differences. I think you should have all names except made up ones in lower case.
    Made up ones? –Cheers, LAX 21:01, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
    Y Done --13 of Diamonds (talk) 21:49, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
  • "Umaga quickly countered". Countered what?
    Y Done
  • Link for "ECW" but not "RAW" and "SmackDown!" for Divas match
    Y Done
  • "was eliminated herself". "herself" unnecessary.
    Y Done
  • "The sixth match of the night". "Night" could include or exclude the dark match.
    Y Done
  • "perform a Pedigree, pinning him for the win". Reword. The Pedigree was not used to pin him, but led to the pin.
    Y Done
  • "retained the tile". Typo.
    Y Done
  • "Steel chair". "Steel" should not be in title case.
    Y Done
  • "who was waring Mysterio's ring attire". typo.
    Guerrero was. Hence why it is within commas after his name. –Cheers, LAX 21:01, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
    I believe it's spelled "wearing".
    Y Done

--13 of Diamonds (talk) 21:36, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

--13 of Diamonds (talk) 23:14, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

  • Remove uses of just "Chavo" to "Guerrero".
    Since I mentioned Vickie Guerrero, there would be confusion if I just mentioned "Guerrero." –Cheers, LAX 23:51, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
  • "further intensified". Is that sourced? If not, remove.
    At the end of the sentence. –Cheers, LAX 23:51, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
    Seems quite subjective anyway. I suggest removing it. --13 of Diamonds (talk) 23:55, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Link "Funaki".
    Y Done.

--13 of Diamonds (talk) 23:43, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] GA pass

I have passed this article as GA class. --13 of Diamonds (talk) 01:15, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Sources for PPV reaction + other stuff

  • Early booking plans call for a couple of matches on the SummerSlam card featuring Jackass cast members, by themselves, or teamed with WWE faces vs WWE heels.
  • Shane McMahon is the one behind the upcoming Jackass angle to be played out on TV over the summer building towards SummerSlam. Shane has wanted to bring them back since the last time they were used in WWE, when they were laid out by Umaga. It was then that Shane wanted to do a longer term angle with them but Stephanie and Triple H disagreed because they felt the Jackass members could not be trusted to do the right thing for wrestling. Vince, in the middle, never gave an answer thus it was not given approval. Since the last time Jackass was on WWE TV, and up until WrestleMania, the ratings have been stong so there was no pressure for Vince to make a decision on the Jackass angle. Recently the USA Networks have come down on WWE for lower ratings and now Vince has agreed.
  • The last time the Jackass members were used in WWE they rubbed alot of people the wrong way by not selling to the wrestlers very good in matches. Umaga had even gotten rough with Steve O to send a message, but did not hurt him. When the WWE was in Tampa for Monday Night Raw on June 4th, Steve O was backstage pissing a lot of people off. Besides being his usual crazy self and not having dressing room etiquette, Steve O had a camera crew with him the entire time, secretly filming, for his upcoming Paparazzi Stuntman DVD. They filmed wrestlers going over finishes ahead of time. They tried filming the wrestlers changing but that was stopped. They even filmed creative going over promos and match details with wrestlers. When Vince found out about all of this he damn near cancelled the whole Jackass angle, but was talked out of it by Shane. Now it appears Shane will be playing backstage babysitter all summer and lots of people are expecting several incidents to happen.
  • Jackass members already signed for the angle are: Steve O, Chris Pontius, Wee-Man, Bam Margera, Ryan Dunn, and Preston Lacey. Johnny Knoxville has yet to agree because he is still in talks. Rake Yohn turned down the angle. Ehren McGhehey and Dave England were not offered a spot.
  • As previously rumored, Triple H is likely to return at SummerSlam for a match with Randy Orton. That match, along with the Jackass match(es) will be co-promoted as the main events.
  • SummerSlam was originally going to be used by WWE to build to the future. Original ideas included: DX vs Team RKO, Triple H vs Edge or Randy Orton, and Vince vs Rey Mysterio.
  • Source stating "Jackass" plans scrapped
  • SLAM! Sports Report - Gives the event a rating of 6.5/10 (Highest match rating 7.5/10 for WWE title match, ECW title match & Rey/Chavo; Lowest match rating 1/10 for World title)
  • WrestlingRevealed Review - Calls matches disappointing (especially Khali/Batista), skits good, especially MVP/Hardy/Austin.
  • TheWrestlingFan Review - Shares same view as the other two on Khali/Batista, also says on whole PPV was "just above average". Out of the three reviews, they all share the same view that Khali v. Batista was crap!
  • Source with the ten superstars that were suspended days after the event. Needs to be included in aftermath, you need to note certain superstars were off TV e.g. Chavo. Quote from article: "On September 7 edition of SmackDown!, Mysterio defeated Chavo Guerrero in an "I Quit" match." - you need to note this was to get Chavo off TV due to the suspension.

Hope this helps. D.M.N. (talk) 17:06, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] RFC: CompleteWWE.com & WrestleView.com reliable?

This article is a well written good article, that is fully sourced. However, during it's FAC, it was pointed out that CompletWWE.com and WrestleView.com are not reliable, however, they are not false reporting/speculating websites like Wrestlezone.com, which at WP:PW is considered unreliable. However, CompleteWWE.com is a website that uses magazines from WWE and uses other sites to report their information, found hereand WrestleView is an established website that has been running since 1997 and reporting Wrestling News, with established reporters, found here. So is CompleteWWE.com and WrestleView.com reliable?--~SRS~ 23:49, 5 May 2008 (UTC)


If they are described neutrally above, I wound consider them reliable. Zginder 2008-05-08T12:45Z (UTC)

I agree with Zginder. From the descriptions, they seem reliable enough (unless, perhaps, they're used to back up controversial claims). Powers T 14:22, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

They seem to be reliable enough for this topic anyways - it's not like many major news sources are going to be covering the things that these sites cover. 63.164.47.227 (talk) 06:16, 19 May 2008 (UTC)