Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Professional wrestling

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Mshake3 (talk | contribs) at 00:52, 18 April 2007 (→‎NWA World Tag Team Championship). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Archive
Archives

An anonymous user claiming to be Smith Hart's son has recently removed information from Smith Hart's article. I've moved his comments to the article's talk page and placed a {{fact}} template concerning the information in question. MadMax 20:49, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've had a little look into Smith Hart's career as a parent and found this Smith had a daughter many years ago that he wasn't taking care of and Badnews Allen was about to adopt her, and in the end, backed out, because as much as he wanted to raise the girl, he felt it would mean a lifetime of Smith Hart being part of his life at Wrestling Observer [1]. I can't imagine why someone would pretend to be Smith Hart's son so I've taken the step of removing Smith's children's from the profile. That is backed up by policy as the only source was a fan essay and they aren't relevant to his career anyway. ŞůṜīΣĻ¹98¹Speak 21:09, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Do we need the article? Govvy 21:36, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm a little uncomfortibe when it comes to artices with "personal information" sections. At least with "trivia" sections it's a bit easier to work relavent information into the article. MadMax 22:21, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

We don't need the article, it could easily go into the Hart family one. Trivia is a tough one because we're not supposed to have them as seperate sections. I guess it comes down to the thinking that if it's trivial then it's not notable. ŞůṜīΣĻ¹98¹Speak 22:28, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

They all seem as trivial as each other (except Bret and Owen), and I can understand keeping Bruce separate because he did at least work for WWF once or twice, but most of the others are not that notable, other than being the son of Stu Hart. Maybe some merging is needed. Darrenhusted 00:25, 14 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Images that have come off WWE.com

I'm letting you know that several users are going around and tagging images that have come off WWE.com, but putting that they fail Wikipedia's status, even if they have WWE photo template on them. I uploaded several earlier today, only for have Yamla tag them all, and leave notes on my talkpage. I think Yamla is trying to personally threaten me. Images include:

All of these (as I've said) have come off WWE.com). I'm really stuck, and have no idea of what to do, I've even put the WWE-photo template on them. He's really put me under a lot of pressure. I don't want them to get deleted.

Davnel03. 17:32, 14 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As has been pointed out to this user, images must adhere to WP:FU. That means only using freely-licensed images, not WWE promotional images, to depict subjects which still exist. It means including a source so we can verify the copyright status. It means including a detailed fair-use rationale for fair-use images. The WWE photo template is part of the solution but does not excuse an image from adhering to WP:FU. --Yamla 17:51, 14 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]


All those images are property of wwe.com to highlight the terms and conditions of wwe.com

OWNERSHIP AND RESTRICTIONS ON USE OF MATERIALS
All materials contained on this web site are the copyrighted property of WWE and its affiliates
and/or our third party licensors. All trademarks, service marks and trade names, including but not
limited to the WWE and WWE marks, as well as the names of its superstars, are proprietary to WWE or
its affiliates and are protected by state, federal and international trademark laws.

There for, you shouldn't be copying anything off from wwe.com so you should {{db|author}} all of them. Govvy 12:14, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

At this point we shouldn't be using any fair use images at all. McPhail
When it comes to posters, there are no free pics. They shouldn't be a problem since they are about an event, not a person. TJ Spyke 21:09, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Notification messages

Given the large amounts of professional wrestlers and related topics frequently nominated either by afd or prod tags, perhaps somesort of <!-- --> message at the head of each article requesting the nominator to notify the PW WikiProject (or at least its author) of its deletion ? MadMax 23:17, 14 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Article authors should always be notified anyway, there is a bot which usually does it. And the request to notify the author is on AFD templates, maybe not PRODs. Darrenhusted 01:15, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, the PROD template also says that you should notify the article's creater: "Nominator: Please consider notifying the author(s) of this page using {{subst:prodwarning|articless name}} ~~~~". TJ Spyke 01:43, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'm guilty of forgetting to do that and I'd reckon a lot of editors are the same ŞůṜīΣĻ¹98¹Speak 01:46, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I only mention it as numerous articles, both notable and non notable, seem to be deleted most often to expired prod tags. Even articles which have been nominated on afd are rarely mentioned on the to do list unless a project member happens to notice it of the main afd page or by other means. MadMax 04:12, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Obsessed With Wrestling

I've run across numerous articles where profiles from ObssessedWithWrestling.com have either been removed or have had the link replaced with a {{fact}} template. Is the website still blacklisted, and if so, should the latter {{fact}} entries be removed ? Either way, there seems to be a large amount of revisions needed. MadMax 07:52, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It was blacklisted for a while, I don't think it still is but the articles haven't been updated since that doesn't happen automatically whereas blacklisted links can in some cases be tagged automatically with bots MPJ-DK 08:00, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
He's right, blacklisted links get tagged by the bots. When they get de-blacklisted though, the rest of us have to fix them. OWW is not blacklisted anymore, so feel free to fix any OWW links that were messed up by bots. TJ Spyke 09:15, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Here are the majority of the reverted pages, if anyone else wants a head start. MadMax 09:41, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Project collaberation

I seem to remember a user bringing up the idea for a project collaberation a few weeks ago and I was curious if that idea ever when anywhere ? It would seem like a logical idea for some sort of "project of the week" such as providing reliable citations for World Championship Wrestling as User:Suriel1981 brought up awhile ago. Another idea might be taking an averge stub article and rewriting it into at least a B-Class article or even bringing pages like Bret Hart, Ric Flair and others to GA-status ? MadMax 09:57, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That's a good idea. Other Wikiprojects (like WP:VG) also pick a different article each week as one that they want the project to especially work on. TJ Spyke 10:00, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I did think that User:MPJ-DK and I did a fairly decent job of rewriting IWCCW. I'd think that with several other members, almost any page could be brought up to a decent looking article. In particular, pages such as Combat Zone Wrestling or Ladies Professional Wrestling Association come to mind. MadMax 10:20, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I like the idea, a weekly project that we could focus on, even if people don't know the actual subject that well they can always have a look at it for readability and copyediting MPJ-DK 19:25, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So, will a "project of the week" section be added on the project page? Kris Classic 21:50, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well we need to pick an actual project - it'd be cool if we could get a tag for the talk page that indicated that "This article was a WP:PW project of the week on XX - YY" MPJ-DK 16:20, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Stick it on the front of the project page and on the to do list as the priority. Darrenhusted 16:24, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A prototype template shamelessly ripped off from WP:VG. MadMax 06:22, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Missing topics lists

I've been working on several missing topics lists based on several of the websites most often used in wrestling articles and I thought they could be useful for a "requested articles" list. Although I am hesitant in creating a Obssessed With Wrestling list, as the notability of a large secion of its independent wrestlers is questionable, although this might serve to weed out such non notable wrestlers. I've also been working on a missing topics list for Gary Will's Wrestling Title Histories.

Also, I've recently finished the 2003 PWI Years as well. MadMax 10:11, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    • Having a profile on a fansite does not mean that a wrestler warrants a Wikipedia article. We cannot compete with other sites in terms of scope, only in terms of quality and verifiability. McPhail 14:38, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is my main reason for not creating an OWW-based list (as well the exclusion of the PWI 500 lists), however both SLAM! Wrestling and the Accelerator's Wrestling Rollercoaster are frequently used as references in Wikipedia's wrestling articles. The lists also would serve to provide a reference or external link for an otherwise unreferenced article. MadMax 22:49, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

      • MadMax, you need to go and fix the links in those PWI 500 lists you made. I noticed a ton of redirects on them, and links that go to pages unreleated to the wrestler. TJ Spyke 21:09, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have been working on them, however many have typos and alternate spellings which contradict with Wikipedia and other wrestling websites, although I have a great deal of help from User:Nikki311. Admittedly, I havn't given much attention to the PWI 500 lists as a wrestlers inclusion doesn't nessessarily signify its notability. MadMax 22:49, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ivan Koloff

I think that Oreal Perras should be renamed to Ivan Koloff, as he is much more well know by that name. Also, his article could use a little work. Kris Classic 22:41, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm all for a rename, it's the name people know him by and yes it could use some TLC 80.80.7.162 06:55, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Btw the above message was from me, I forgot to log in MPJ-DK 08:07, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I have spiffed it up some, if anybody cares. Kris Classic 23:10, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Anyone want to put this up for deletion?-- bulletproof 3:16 01:14, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • I've placed a {{notability}} tag on the article and notified the editor. I do follow independent wrestling to some extent, I've never heard of the promotion myself. MadMax 03:08, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
"SCCW is a promotion that i created and i just wanted to make a page for it, cuz i'm bored. The only real source that i have is a notebook that's about the promotion." —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Wrestlingcrazy93 (talkcontribs) 03:14, 16 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]
  • I received this message from the author on my talk page. I'm assuming this should be deleted ? MadMax 03:27, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe he should be told that WP is not for promoting NN indy feds or for creating stuff just because you are bored. I put a speedy tag on it for not inserting notability. TJ Spyke 03:31, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mid-PPV Results Edits

I seem to notice that the Pay-Per-View articles are often vandalized by people mid-PPV, while results are being posted. Most of these are by unregistered people. Suggestion: Should we automatically semi-protect Pay-Per-View articles maybe an hour before the PPV starts, keep it protected during the PPV and maybe for sometime after it, then unprotect it? Might cut down on the vandalism, it's starting to get very annoying. Trivialbass619 01:44, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WWE PPV's get protected ahead of time because of vandalism. With TNA PPV's, people usually don't start the vandalism until the event starts. We have dicussed this before, WP policy doesn't allow protection as a pre-emptive measure. TJ Spyke 01:56, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nitro Girls

I did some revising of the Nitro Girls article and I noticed a reference "Nitro Girls" by Richards & Southern, 1999. however I'm unable to find any book by that name (the closest reference I could find being the 2001 Swimsuit Calender Special). MadMax 04:12, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

wXw

The World Xtreme Wrestling article survived the Afd (good job), so now that it's a keeper we should get really serious about this article and add the following

  • A section on wXw's predecessor Trans World Wrestling Federation founded in the 70s
  • A section on the Wild Samoan's school since this is the most logical place for it
  • Title history for the wXw
  • A Roster / Alumni list.

Just cause it's not being deleted doesn't mean we shouldn't improve it, we should show that we're serious when we defend an article against deletion MPJ-DK 14:12, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

He's back

Burntsauce is not affiliated with the current JB sock farm apparently, and since unblocked has immediately started up again as you can see here. SirFozzie 17:25, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Fatal Four Way" edit war over at WWE No Mercy

The page has officially been locked because of the continued edit war between TJ Spyke and Maestro25. Sigh. Edwardtang 17:32, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No way you have got to be kidding me, is this the purpose of WP:PW? Is this the biggest problem facing our articles right now? I'm sorry but I'm speachless and then to say "Let's go to WP:PW to see if they say "dash" or "no dash" because NEITHER of you have had the though, "You know with or without the dash it's still the same match type" and then moved the heck on to articles that need sourcing, articles that need expanding, copy editing or adding to wikipedia, I mean seriously! MPJ-DK 19:36, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I say straw poll, right here, right now on this page, both parties to agree with the result. It's bad enough Burntsauce keeps blanking Buff Bagwell, but an edit war over a dash. I vote "Fatal Four Way" as the four refers to the four people and neither the Fatal nor the Way. Darrenhusted 21:13, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Fatal Four-Way" is grammatically correct, WWE has used it on more than one occasion, and third party sources use it. Seems pretty simple to me. TJ Spyke 21:20, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Vote then. We'll count up the project votes on this. I'm already putting out fires on Buff Bagwell page where Burntsauce seems to imply this project is a joke. Let's end that. One vote "Four Way" one vote "Four-Way". Darrenhusted 21:23, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

An edit war because of a dash or no dash? Lame edit war #100000000 on Wikipedia. RobJ1981 21:38, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
K. We've extensively established that it's lame. I agree. There's no need for more posts saying that it's a lame argument. I'm irritated with both folks involved in the edit war. Let's vote, come to a consensus as a project, then move on with a dicision so we don't get pages unnecessarily locked again. Edwardtang 21:50, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I refuse to vote in this, it doesn't matter which it is - why don't both of you pick a random number and the one that is closest to the NASDAQ on close of buisness Wednsday April 18th is the one we pick because there is no real differences between "Fatal Four Way" and "Fatal Four-Way", might as well let randomness settle this instead of a vote with subsequent arguing. MPJ-DK 04:31, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough. I don't really care other than the fact that it was an unnecessary edit war between two obstinate editors and I thought it mattered. If no one cares, then I don't care either. Edwardtang 05:51, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This seems a lot like the American English vs. British English debate. Wouldn't it be simpler to keep whatever is consistant in any one specific article ? MadMax 06:13, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It was "Four-Way", as it is in every other wrestling PPV article. Maestro just decided to start changin it in this article all of a sudden. TJ Spyke 06:28, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
If it's indeed four-way on most (or all) other articles: then No Mercy should be the same. I haven't checked every article, so I'm not going to assume all are the same. In my opinion: either way is just fine, as it's not a big deal in the long run. The article isn't bad, by having (or not having) a dash. RobJ1981 23:30, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the BLP issues

I've brought up a discussion at the BLP Talk Page to try to get things a bit more settled. Right now, Burnt is saying that "letters from Jimbo" trump the written policy as it stands. I think we need to find out once and for all what defines contentious material, and then either apply the standard to all articles (my laugh test is what this "uber-BLP" policy would do to the Bill Clinton article, and yes, it fails that), or bring BLP back to sanity. SirFozzie 21:40, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Burntsauce seems to think that anything other than their name and birth date is contentious. I agree that I doubt what he is doing would be accepted if he did it to Bill Clinton or Queen Elizabeth II's article (removing everything that isn't sourced, regardless of whether it is contentious or not). TJ Spyke 21:44, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well, the admin who unblocked him told us to STFU basically, to get off our ass and ignore the policy as it was written (I've edited it per his comments). SirFozzie 22:40, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
He only gets away with his disruputive and Pointy behavior because few people outside this project have any respect for the wrestling articles, if he did the same to mainstream articles that get a lot of views there'd be an uproar for sure. MPJ-DK 04:28, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It seems like, instead of beating your head against the Burntsauce wall, it might be less painful to simply find some sources for the blasted article. — Gwalla | Talk 03:44, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You could also make the point, considering the time he spends on specifically on wrestling articles, that he might be able to find sources himself (or at the very least place a {{reference}} tag). MadMax 06:15, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Attention: your award proposal has passed.

Hello. Your recent proposal for a new award for your WikiProject has passed. The discussion has been archived and the award added to the awards page here. Congratulations!

Things you can do:

  1. Create a template for the award to make it easier to use. Please see other templates for a style guide.
  2. Tag any images used in the award with Category:Wikipedia awards.
  3. Tag any templates used in the award with <noinclude>[[:Category:Award templates]]</noinclude>
  4. Place the award on your project page so people know you have an award.
  5. Start giving it out to users!

Regards, Smomo 00:38, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Created the template: Template:The Wrestling Star and tagged it under wrestling. TJ Spyke 00:56, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I also just added it to the project page. TJ Spyke 01:07, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Image tagged now as well. So everything is set up and it can be given out now. TJ Spyke 03:51, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Could you change the template to accurately reflect the title of the award, please? Smomo 11:48, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
To what, The Professional Wrestling Star? TJ Spyke 19:12, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
swwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwweeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeet, I decided to give it to Bmg916 hehe. :) Govvy 19:41, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
To Snomo. I posted this on your talk page as well: See the awards page. Barnstars don't have those really long names. They are supposed to be short, simple, and easy to understand. "The Wrestling Star" fits that, and is similar to other project barnstars. TJ Spyke 21:16, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Does anybody besides Smomo have any objections to the name and look of the barnstar? TJ Spyke 00:23, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Anyone want to put this up for deletion?-- bulletproof 3:16 04:50, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nominated for deletion. TJ Spyke 05:01, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Maryland Championship Wrestling

The article Maryland Championship Wrestling was deleted yesterday under G1 as patant nonsence. while in my opinion this is certainly a notable regional promotion, does anyone know if there was a prod tag listed or if it had recently been nominated for deletion ? It should be taken into consideration that the article may have been blanked or vandalized with al the recent trouble lately. MadMax 06:34, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have asked the admin who deleted it for the details, why it was deleted and if I could get a copy of the version he deleted. It's a notable indy fed, and it would be a shame to have to start over from scratch. TJ Spyke 06:54, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Presenting: The Pro Wrestling Collaboration of the Week section

I've taken the suggestion of several project members and made a sub page Wikipedia:Professional Wrestling Collaboration of the week which is where we can nominate and determine which wrestling related article should be our next "Collaboration of the Week". Yes I was inspired by WP:VG version of it. It's just a first draft so if something on the page needs fixing either fix it or leave a note here.

I also got the ball rolling with a nomination, hopefully others will follow suitMPJ-DK 19:09, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

USWA Results

I am working on sourcing Dennis Knight, Mark Canterbury and The Godwinns – I got their WCW days and their WWF days pretty well covered with the reliable sources I know off. But I can’t find any reliable, usable sources that can tell me anything about their days in the USWA as ”Tex Sallinger” (Knight) and ”The Master Blaster” (Canterbury) I only get stuff on forums that’s not really usable.

Anyone got a decent source for USWA results round 91-93?? MPJ-DK 19:28, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's about Memphis wrestling in general, but there are USWA results here: [2]. TJ Spyke 19:32, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I totally forgot to look there, unfortunately no hits :( MPJ-DK 20:00, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

NWA World Tag Team Championship

Since We're placing NWA championships into world, national, and regional subcategories, I'm curious as to what we should do regarding the NWA World Tag Team Titles. In the articles, the Mid-Atlantic version of the titles is basically represented as THE NWA World Tag Team Titles. However, the NWA Board didn't have or recognize any "world" tag titles until 1992. So, if that's the case, then shouldn't all of the reigns of this particular championship be subcategorized as regional rather than world? Just curious to know where everyone stands on that.Odin's Beard 00:49, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sure. If the title wasn't of World title status (by it's owner no less) then it should be noted as such. Mshake3 00:52, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

TNA Championships

From my observations of recent articles from TNAWrestling.com, it appears that TNA is phasing out the NWA name from their championships. This could mean the change in championships that was announced a while back. Just keep an eye out. Mshake3 00:50, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]