# Talk:Nick Bockwinkel

His height/weight is listed as 5'10"/240 on his WWE bio page. If there is a more authoritative source that puts him at 6'1"/247, feel free to put it in, but barring that the WWE stats should stand. Brad E. Williams (talk) 11:34, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

When I was looking around trying to find a reference for when he married his wife Darlene, I came across an obituary for a woman that lists him as a former husband, and even includes Darlene has his current spouse. Any other information on that? Here is the obit in question: http://thegardenisland.com/news/local/obituaries/obituaries-for-saturday---july/article_9d284d5c-c266-5bd1-83e8-5a1682d554af.html
There is also an obituary for her under the name Susan Bockwinkel in the Hanalei, HI paper though it doesn't contain any information about Nick. Brad E. Williams (talk) 13:23, 15 November 2015 (UTC)

I have a hard time believing that Nick Bockwinkel is 71 years old. (As of 12/2005) I don't dispute it, but I figured he'd be in his early to mid 60's at most.
In my opinion, Bockwinkel is one of the most underrated performers of his era.

Mr. Dawg...
Wrestling fan since 1969.

Yeah, Bockwinkel is 71. He became a star at an older age than most.
A lot of the information for this article came from the book, "Top 100 Pro wrestlers of All-Time", by John.F.Molinaro

This article was automatically  assessed because at least one article was rated and this bot brought all the other ratings up to at least that level. BetacommandBot 00:13, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

Tricky Nicky Bockwinkel - The New Illustrated Wrestling News A.W.A. Edition - 1971 No.46.jpg
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 00:06, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:Nick Bockwinkel/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Vogon101 (talk · contribs) 20:43, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

Also judging with reference to Wikipedia:WikiProject_Professional_wrestling/Style_guide and Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Biography

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
Pass
It is reasonably well written.
a (prose, spelling, and grammar):  b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): 
Prose is reasonably well written but very dense and hard to follow in places, especially in later sections of the chronology. Whilst this could be improved I think it still meets the requirement for GA; Lead Section:  - clear introduction section summarising main points of the article; Layout:  Article is in chronological order with reasonable sub-headings breaking up the prose. Headings are standard.; Words to watch ; Fiction *N/A*; Lists  Unsure about the list "Championships and accomplishments" - feel this could be better with dates of accomplishments, perhaps presented as a table, especially as most of the info is covered in the prose this could (perhaps) be a collapsing table As mentioned by McPhail this is actually the correct format as per  professional wrestling project style guide which is a section I'd missed (mea culpa!) so this is all good.  Overall this I think all meets the requirements for GA status though prose could be improved over time :)
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (reference section):  b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):  d (copyvio and plagiarism): 
No obvious plagiarism or copyright violations. Sources seem to be reasonable reliable for this topic, generally being websites dedicated to chronicling this sort of history as well as suitable books
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects):  b (focused): 
Article covers the whole professional and personal life of the subject in sufficient but not excessive detail. Life history may be slightly too detailed, however it certainly doesn't reach the level of Wikipedia:Splitting (see Wikipedia:Summary_style#When_to_avoid_splits).
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias: 
Article is fair to the subject, covers the main points of his life without passing opinion in Wikipedia's voice
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.: 
Most edits seem to be by same user @McPhail with last large edits back in August 2021
It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales):  b (appropriate use with suitable captions): 
Media seems to be suitably public domain, could certainly be more though if it is available
Overall:
Pass/Fail: 

@Vogon101: many thanks for all your work on this review. With regards to the "Championships and accomplishments" section, this is the format set out in the Wikipedia Professional Wrestling Manual of Style, which is used on thousands of articles. I'd therefore be somewhat reluctant to introduce a new format purely for this article. McPhail (talk) 09:10, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
Wow - had completely missed this section - in that case all looks good to me! Vogon101 (talk) 10:10, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
@Vogon101:: thank you very much, that's excellent. McPhail (talk) 11:13, 5 January 2022 (UTC)