Talk:WrestleMania/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Archive 1 Archive 2 →

Contents

DETROIT ATTENDANCE

It mentions Detroit as having 93,000 fans in the intro and the next paragraph is says 80,000. This discrepency is quite large and not consistant which is what wikipedia wants (as well as to take over Armenia)

93,000 fans was for WrestleMania III in Pontiac, Michigan. 80,000 was for WrestleMania 23 in Detroit, Michigan. -- bulletproof 3:16 03:28, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Too many comparisons

"WrestleMania is to WWE as the World Cup is to FIFA, Super Bowl is to the NFL, the World Series is to MLB, the Stanley Cup Finals is to the NHL, and the NBA Finals is to the NBA"

One comparison should suffice.

Stuff being deleted.

It seems one or two people seem to think they own this page. I am constantly seeing stuff being deleted because of "too much trivia". Yet there is a ton of trivia ALREADY on the page. So who decided that their trivia is superior to anything else. Nuttyskadork 07:46, 27 November 2006 (UTC)Nuttyskadork

Gimmick battle royal

I have heard that Slaughter was emant to win this, but the Sheik's knees couldn't take a tumble from the top, so it was switched.(Halbared 14:33, 3 June 2006 (UTC))

That is correct. Slaughter was supposed to win the match but Sheik couldn't take a fall over the top rope(he could barely even walk to the ring). They let him get the last word though by putting Sheik in the Cobra Clutch after the match. TJ Spyke 00:23, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Liberace

The Liberace article says he was at the first wrestlemania. --Gbleem 04:49, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Comparisons

is what the...FA Cup Final is to the English Soccer Leagues

This is not strictly true, as the FA Cup tournament is completely independent of the league structure - and is open to teams outside the professional league structure. Gretnagod 17:55, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Other Undefeated Streaks

I have added the undefeated streakes of Edge, John Cena, Mr.T and Virgil. --Killswitch Engage 21:24, 29 March 2006 (UTC)Killswitch Engage

Can Mr.T and Virgil really be considered undefeated streaks? Mr. T had just two (which were over twenty years ago, so likely not to be continued further), and Virgil had two, which were over ten years and and likely to not be continued. Edge is alright, because he has 4-0 right now, and a 99% chance of going 5-0 in less than a week. John Cena is alright for now, because he most likely will end it this week, or, if not, it's 3-0 for a current superstar, which is fine. tv316 14:45, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
Ya good point, ill remove Mr.T and Virgil.

--Killswitch Engage 22:32, 30 March 2006 (UTC)Killswitch Engage

WM 23

The date and place is not confirmed. Stop adding it until it's confirmed please. --Killswitch Engage 02:33, 2 April 2006 (UTC)Killswitch Engage

Please, wait until WM 22 when the venue is confirmed before adding it as confirmed. --Killswitch Engage 05:01, 2 April 2006 (UTC)Killswitch Engage

Request for Comment

Hiya, I stopped in as a result of the RfC on italics, but can't tell what exactly the issue is? Could someone please explain the exact question that comment is being requested for? --Elonka 20:47, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

We are discussing whether or not every WrestleMania article should have the event written in Italics (WrestleMania). (see WrestleMania 22) however Wikipedia's manual of style lists the cases that Italics should be used for, and WrestleMania does not fall into any of those categories. I am wondering what other users' input is on this.-3bulletproof16 08:52, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
How does it tend to appear in other major media articles? I would make the Wikipedia article consistent with how other external press tends to handle it. --Elonka 16:50, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
Here's the article for Super Bowl XL. No use of Italics is made when "Super Bowl XL" or a team name or any other event is noted in the article. While some argue that because IMDB classifies WrestleMania as a straight to video movie release, it therefore falls into the "Film" category of Wikipedia's manual of style for the use of Italics. However, the articles on Wikipedia for WrestleMania are for the events, NOT the movie releases. -3bulletproof16 09:52, 19 April 2006 (UTC).

ECW Brand Involvement

Hey, does anyone know if the new ECW brand is going to be involved in Wrestlemania now that its a part of WWE? GunFactor007 23:43, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

It is WAY too early to even begin speculating whether or not the ECW brand will be part of WrestleMania or any other WWE PPV ("Big Four"). On a side note, speculation is not allowed on Wikipedia.3bulletproof16 03:42, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
I guess it's still early to decide, but if the ECW brand is not canceled, then it will probably be a part of Wrestlemania, since it is going to be a part of Summerslam 2006 according to the poster. --Andresg770 18:40, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
I found an article that's an interview with Paul Heyman, and according to him ECW will be involved at Wrestlemania. Here's the article: The Link GunFactor007 3:19, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

ECW's dead. Most ECW fans call it WWECW. It'll die soon so I don't think they'll be in it. Factual80man

The Grandaddy of Them All

Is it Wrestlemania or Starrcade? The name is mentioned in both articles, so which event got the name first and who copied whom? --MartinSL 09:19, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

I've never heard of StarrCade being called that before. TJ Spyke 03:52, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Well, it's mentioned in the Starrcade article. MartinSL 06:34, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

I see, I just never heard of it being called that on TV/PPV. I haven't seen most of the early ones though (pre-1993). TJ Spyke 20:30, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
Wrestlemania's the big one. Starrcade was WCW's version of Wrestlemania; ie, their biggest show of the year. VelvetKevorkian 21:27, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
Wrong, the first Starrcade was in 1983 & aired on CCTV, so it predates Wrestlemania. Starrcade was called "The Grandaddy of Them All" after WWF & NWA added more televised Supercards. WrestleMania has never been referred to as that.--Hndsmepete 00:09, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
Actually, WrestleMania has been called it too. TJ Spyke 00:12, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
WrestleMania has been referred to as that numerous times.

Bmg916 Speak to Me 00:19, 8 March 2007 (UTC)


I don't quite think that either Starrcade nor WrestleMania are the first wrestling "supercards" broadcast on closed circuit television. 'Showdown at Shea' was broadcast on CCTV and predates both cards by years.

What makes WrestleMania and Starrcade any different than Showdown at Shea? Not to say of course that even 'Shea was the first "supercard" to be on CCTV, but Starrcade is NOT the first wrestling supercard by ANY means. The only differance between the two events is that 'Shea pre-dates the 80's wrestling boom and Vincent K. McMahon's ownership of WWWF/WWF/WWE. ~ EudaemonWWF

Redundant/Stupid Trivia

Some of the trivia is redundant or just plain stupid. It mentions the Hogan/Yokozuna thing about 5 times

Howard Finkle

Wasnt Howard Finkle at every Wrestlemania? Shouldnt that be under the trivia section?


Promo Music

Does anybody know what the promo music is in the beginning of WM X8 & WM XIX where the superstars are all talking about what WM means to them? ViperBite 02:16, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Table

The date table is fucked up? Can somebody un-fuck it? 86.20.53.195 22:23, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

WTF???

Who the hell deleted the table with all the information about the 23 Wrestlemanias? I'm bringing that back. That person who contributed the attendance is correct and I brang that back. Factual80man

Please note that Brang is not a word.

Logo

should we replace the wrestlemania logo with the wrestlemania 23 logo? 244pupil6 10 February 13:45

Not really. Since the bodega sans logo is still the default WrestleMania logo used by WWE. -- bulletproof 3:16 20:31, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Wretslemania 24

http://www.411mania.com/wrestling/news/50887/WWE-News:-Weekend,-Candice,-PPV-Schedule,-ECW,-More.htm I don't know how reliable this source is but according to them, Wrestlemania 24 is going to air on March 30, 2008. Do you think maybe we should put that on the table or wait a little longer? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.240.120.155 (talk) 22:36, 16 February 2007 (UTC).

  • We should wait until they officially announce it during WrestleMania 23. MarcK 02:08, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
    • Sorry, I'm new to editing, I added the WrestleMania 24 information, it has been on the news here all night, so it's pretty official. Except I don't know how to add the number right on the references part. I can't get the 5 in the right place. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tekkodbz (talk • contribs)
      • A local news anchor is not official. The location of WM 24 is not official unless WWE announced it, anything else will be reverted as vandalism. TJ Spyke 03:15, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
If the news article is true then an official WWE announcement will be sooner than WM 23, more specifically tomorrow at 10:30 am eastern time. So it's only really a matter of 30 hours from this post I'm making. -- Oakster  Talk  08:33, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
And once again, the rumours have been proved wrong. It wasn't the Amway Arena all along, it's the Citrus Bowl. That's the policy in action. -- Oakster  Talk  14:49, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

10 Greatest matches?

I was wondering if we should note the "10 greatest matches special" that aired in 2004? It was done by the WWE and (supposedly) selected by the wrestlers. Thoughts? -- Scorpion0422 23:52, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

I think thats a ridiculous idea. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.110.23.136 (talk • contribs)

Why? -- Scorpion0422 22:39, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

I Say...add it.--Monnitewars (talk) 01:48, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

I don't think it would add anything to the article. "Top 10" type lists in general aren't worth noting. TJ Spyke 01:55, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
I also think that would be nothing but cruft. Nikki311 16:20, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Image war

According to this, which is an explanation of policy, you shouldn't take a bunch of fair use images and make one file of them, and the gif in question combines 23 copyrighted logos. The logos for every Mania are rather unnecessary and I think the one image was fine. -- Scorpion0422 03:35, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

CONTINUED BELOW...--Monnitewars (talk) 03:38, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Consenssus needed...

There is a dispute to which photo should be on WrestleMania. Photo A or Photo B. Which one?--Monnitewars (talk) 03:34, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

You shouldn't delete others comments (like you did at WP:PW). Anyways, I think having a GIF filled with 23 copyrighted images might be violating WP:FU. Might want to check with an admin on that. TJ Spyke 04:15, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
(1) Stop trying to settle absolutely everything with edit wars. (2) There is no need for using that many copyrighted pictures. The guidelines say to ue minimal fair use pictures. 23 is definitely not minimal. GaryColemanFan 21:50, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
Monnitewars has been blocked as a sock of Hornetman13, so no consensus is needed. Not that it would have meant anything anyway, as we aren't allowed to just decide to piss in the mouth of international copyright laws. The Hybrid T/C 00:53, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
Perhaps we should get rid of the logo and use a free image like this. -- Scorpion0422 17:23, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

WWE or WWF?

I am sure this has been discussed before, but needs to be clarified. References to the company and the championship prior to 2002 are being referred to as "WWF." I personally feel this is wrong - just once should it be clarified that until 2002, the company and the title had the name "WWF." The WWE also uses "WWE" for all events/champions prior to its renaming. V i s n a v a 18:17, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

The reason why WWE does that is because legally they HAVE to. They are not allowed to use the "WWF" initials (or the WWF scratch logo) anymore, which is why they changed their name in the first place. There was no "WWE" before May 6, 2002 and we shouldn't pretend that there was. You don't see us going back and changing every references to SNK (a video game company) to SNK Playmore (it's current name). TJ Spyke 22:33, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
I disagree - its not about legal obligation. "SNK" may be a comfortable abbreviation to SNK Playmore and thus may be referred to as so infrequently. But its about the correct name with WWE, which affects the abbreviation. Are the title histories of the WWF Title and the WWE Title different? How will you interchange their use without confusing the reader? Here, you have every WrestleMania up to 19 talking about the WWF Title and suddenly there is a change. When they undergo a name change, cities are referred to by their new name all the time, with a brief note explaining their former name and name change. I just feel it should be uniform - WWE Championship (then the WWF Championship) and so forth. V i s n a v a 22:51, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
WP:PW has already settled on this issue, and one of the set instructions is to make sure all references to the company before May 6, 2002 are WWF (and all references before 1979 are WWWF). If you disagree, bring it up there because WP:PW policy is for WWF to be used when the company was WWF. TJ Spyke 22:53, 3 December 2007 (UTC)