Talk:The Undertaker/Archive 6

message: *On SmackDown! tonight (10/9/07) they billed him at 299 lbs. Should his billed weight be changed? -- 03:55, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Billed Weight

message: Shouldn't the top photo be updated, showing one with his current gimmick, as opposed to a gimmick he hasn't had for three years?Taker04 (talk) 08:49, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Photo

message: No mention of their winning the championships together. Explain... Lex94 Talk  Contributions Guest Book 23:20, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Rock/Taker

message: It doesnt really make a Triangle Choke a finishing moves because he only used it one match to make The Great Khali tap out SocialistRevolution (talk) 00:28, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: He has used it before, though it is not a common maneuver for him to use. In addition to making Khali tap, it was most notably used at the No Way Out 2006 as a finisher against Kurt Angle, who reversed it into a jackknife pin. --Enhanceddownloadbird (talk) 01:34, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Then it should be a signature move instead of a finisher. SocialistRevolution (talk) 23:23, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It was also used against Angle in a title match on Smackdown in 2002, which ended in a dual pin/submission. Defintly a signature move. Mshake3 (talk) 06:13, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

text: I have to agree that the move is not a signature nor a finishing move. A signature move is a move used consistently in almost every match. Nikki311 23:55, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

text: It's gone. Nikki311 19:45, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

text: Taker does use the suicide dive a lot. He's used it in a lot of PPVs, so why would you delete it?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.247.254.166 (talk) 03:36, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

text: I had removed it, but apparently someone added it back. I've removed it again. Nikki311 21:35, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

text: Just to keep things clean, it wasn't me who added it as a finisher. I moved it up a few spaces on the 'Signature moves' list once, but that's it. Dlae│here 16:48, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Triangle Choke 

message: Because this page is so long, I propose that we merge the theme music, nicknames, and signature taunts into the Personas of The Undertaker article. I think it makes more sense there anyway, as some of the taunts, music, and nicknames were only for particular personas. Not only would the merge shorten this page (which is well over the recommended maximum length) but it will cut down on some of the listy aspects of the page. Add # ~~~~ to your vote below. Nikki311 13:16, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the debate was merge. Nikki311 14:45, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

text: The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
The debate was open for five days with no opposes. The debate is now closed. Nikki311 14:45, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge proposal 

message: Why has this been changed to a poorly presented paragraph? 202.12.233.21 (talk) 21:20, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Paragraphs are preferred by GA and FA reviewers over lists (especially short lists). If you think it it poorly presented, perhaps you would like to suggest a way to fix it? Nikki311 21:28, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Explain the change to his filmography section 

message: This article over uses the term.  Not only that, but it makes it written in passive prose, instead of saying, he defeated hogan, he was booked to defeat hogan.  It is adding unnecessary length to the article.  I think we all know that pro-wrestling matches are works, and can get past that, and still make this article a better article.  Since I am new to editing PW articles, I want opinions before I start cleaning it up.LessThanClippers (talk) 19:36, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It has to be made clear that wrestling is not real in the article and that events are staged. It must be written out of universe. However, replacing some of the "booked" with other terms isn't a bad idea. Gavyn Sykes (talk) 19:40, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: As Gavyn said, it has to be made 100% clear that all wrestling is scripted to have a chance at passing a Good Article review. I know it is weird at first, but just like any other form of writing, after awhile, it becomes second nature to see it that way. Another option is to say "As part of his latest push, he won the championship." I have no problem if you want to change some of the former to the latter to mix it up a bit, but the article must stay written "out-of-universe". Nikki311 19:55, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Another option is adding "kayfabe before a word that without it would make it sound real. Gavyn Sykes (talk) 19:59, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Isn't there away to adress it once in an article?  I mean, since all pw is scripted, is there a way to adress it once?  I've read many articles on here that say, he won the title at backlash, or defeated so and so, without saying it is a work each time.  Every match in WWE is a work (outside of Brawl for All)  I took the following sentence from the HHH article, rated GA, by the way...
Triple H dropped the WWE Championship to Vince McMahon on the September 16, 1999 edition of SmackDown! before regaining it at Unforgiven in a Six-Pack Challenge that included Davey Boy Smith, Big Show, Kane, The Rock, and Mankind. He defeated Stone Cold Steve Austin at No Mercy 1999 before dropping the title to The Big Show at Survivor Series 1999.LessThanClippers (talk) 23:00, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Booked to defeat, booked to win, booked, booked booked

message: Since I'm still new at this, I just want to make sure before I go ahead and make this change.  Shouldn't "kayfabe" only be linked once?  It currently is linked every time it appears in the article.  I can quickly fix this if I am correct.  Thanks.  LessThanClippers (talk) 17:55, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The rule is that it should be linked the first time it appears under each header. If it is linked more that once in a section, go ahead and remove it. Nikki311 18:06, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Ahhh, thanks.  Is that the same rule for all links?LessThanClippers (talk) 18:09, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes. Nikki311 18:11, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Wait, it's once per section? I thought it was once per prose sections of the article (meaning you could link again in Personal life or championships. Gavyn Sykes (talk) 18:21, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's once under each header/sub-header. If you link something in under one header, you can link it again under another. Say you link WWE under 1997-1999, you can link it again under Championships and accomplishments, and again under Personal life. Does that answer the question? Nikki311 18:31, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Certainly helps me, thanks Nikki LessThanClippers (talk) 18:47, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

text: Yup, thanks Nikki. I've been here eleven months and misinterpreted that rule. Lol. Well, live and learn. :) Gavyn Sykes (talk) 19:20, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Kayfabe

message: Does anyone have information regarding the storylines (not just who he feuded with, but what the plots were) or maybe a little more about the persona?  I think that would really help this article.  I'll do some research, but I really have never seen any.LessThanClippers (talk) 18:50, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: WCW

message: In an effort to curtail nickname lists, and clean up the ridiculous length of this article, I am reccomending the following changes...
Keep The Phenom, The Deadman, and 'Taker bold as they are currently used and most common.
Keep The American Bad Ass and Big Evil, unbolded, as they are out of date or rarely used anymore.
remove, Grim Reaper and Reaper, without sourcing, I really can't ever really remember that as a nickname.
Remove Booger Red, even though it is sourced, it is a 1 time comment, and is not a true nickname, its more an issue of trivia, and should probably be removed.  However, it might make for interesting extra info in the prose.
Remove Red Devil, Demon of Death Valley and Lord of Darkness, no mention in article and no sourcing.
Any comments?LessThanClippers (talk) 23:57, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That sounds good to me. Tomorrow, I plan to close the above Merge proposal and move them all to the Personas of The Undertaker article anyway. That'll cut down on length. Nikki311 00:03, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Booger Red was used for a short while after Wrestlemania X8, not just once from what I've been able to gather. It is, however, notable, because it is a nickname that management asked to be removed. I think it would be censorship to remove it. It is a sourced nickname, why would we change our rules on sourcing nicknames as soon as we started? --EnhancedDownloadBird (Upload) - 00:51, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The question wasn't sourcing, it was notability.  If it only lasted a very short time, then it probably isn't that notable.  However, now with a little more understanding, I do find it notable.  I also think, however, that addidng this information to the prose would be helpful.LessThanClippers (talk) 00:56, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Curtailing nickname list

message: Just a quick note about sourcing: youtube can't be used as a source because of copyright issues. Also, when adding citations, it is best to use a citation template. Nikki311 02:23, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah, my mistake, I made two sets of edits with Youtube. How do we distinguish between what's still under copyright though? These are defunct promotions, couldn't they be free use now? --EnhancedDownloadBird (Upload) - 03:11, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Honestly, I'm not certain. Perhaps posting a quick message at WPT:PW would be best to answer that question. It's been mentioned there a couple of times, so I know at least a couple of people 100% know the rules on youtube and copyrights. Nikki311 13:47, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If it once was copyright, it will remain copyright untill it is released under a free licence, or expires into the public domain which is in a very long time (I think 100 years after the death of the creator, but even if it's 50 years, the answer is "way too long"). Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 13:51, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sourcing 

message: This page lists Undertaker teaming with Spivey in the WCW days and going by the name The Skyscrapers.  Spivey's page lists The Skyscrapers as Spivey and Sid Vicious.  With neither being sourced, was wondering if anyone had any of this info.  I can research it once I get home (have limited internet at the office)LessThanClippers (talk) 22:31, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Spivey and Skyscrapers

message: I doubt there is much mroe info out there.  Should we remove the expansion tags?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by LessThanClippers (talk • contribs) 22:23, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: WCW and Early Career Sections

message: Does 2008 really need its own section at this time.  IO don't see a signifigant change in his persona/path, so I would rather incorporate this into 2006-2008 until such time it is necessary.  Thoughts?LessThanClippers (talk) 01:31, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with that. Gavyn Sykes (talk) 01:41, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: 2008

message: While Dangerous Danny Spivey was a member of The Skyscrapers, the greatesy level of success came when it was Mean Mark and Sid Vicious. I can't give specifics - but I do recall that they were my favorite tag team at that time (surpassing Road Warriors - which was a major accomplishment) - and won the Belt at least once.
Sorry to embellish - but this profile of The Skyscrapers could not be devoid of Sid Vicious.
Upward (talk) 04:21, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Undertaker - WCW years 

message: Does anyone know the name of the choke The Undertaker put on Big Daddy V on Smackdown. If you do can someone add it to his finishers list. Fresh Prince Carlton (talk) 16:14, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Please do not add it to the list of finishers.  Using a move 1 time does not make it a signature move.  LessThanClippers (talk) 17:25, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: We'll probably find out next week or the week after what it actually was. It'll probably be something he ends up using on the big guys or something. Arrowny (talk) 19:29, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it was a desperation modified triangle chokethat was a one-time use to give Undertaker the duke. If he uses it tonight in the tag match, then maybe we can consider including it. Otherwise, no. Lemon Demon (talk) 18:14, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The move was a modified Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu hold called the Gogoplata. I added it to his finishers, since he used it tonight after chokeslamming Mark Henry during the tag match, instead of just going for the pin, which suggests that it's going to be a permanent part of his arsenal. Hope it's all right. :) SanjuroHayashida (talk) 03:05, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It's a signature move, not a finisher. Cheers, LAX 04:43, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Although I kinda disagree, since WWE.com was hyping it as "a mysterious new finisher that took down the 500-pound mastadon and left him bleeding", it should be left as a signature move for now. If he finishes a couple more matches with it, I really think it should be added as a finisher. SanjuroHayashida (talk) 14:28, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Hm, tough one. I suggest we wait a little while. It is looking more likely to be his next signature/finishing move. Oh, and keep a tally of how many times it's used. Now it's at 2. Lemon Demon (talk) 01:36, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: My guess is he will start using it for his larger opponents since he tends to wrestle giants a lot. He's pretty strong as it is, but its gotta be hard to do the tombstone and last ride on 400 to 500 lb guys, especially since hes not a young guy anymore68.164.85.197 (talk) 05:09, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: He used it on Edge at Wrestlemania XXIV to win the World Heavyweight Championship for a second time. //\\ AirbusA346 //\\ (talk) 10:45, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: He also has used it on Matt Stryker before. Armedhamster (talk) 06:29, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Spolier Alert: Does anyone know the name of the modified triangle choke he did??? 

message: 2007-2008 section, second paragraph:
On the January 4, 2008 Edition of SmackDown! The Undertaker competed in a Beat the Clock challenge for the number one contention for the World Heavyweight Championship at the Royal Rumble against Mark Henry with Matt Striker as the Special Guest Referee The Undertaker had 6 Minutes and 2 Seconds to beat Mark Henry with 15 Seconds left on the clock The Undertaker performed a chokeslam and Striker began the count and stopped before the 3-count was completed and ran out The Undertakers time and removed his chances at competing for the World Heavyweight Championship.
As you can see, it's very poorly written. I'd rewrite it myself so that it wasn't some gigantic, endless mess of words, but the article is protected, and I don't have an account. 67.142.130.42 (talk) 05:39, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Bloody hell, that was horribly written. I've cleaned it up and fixed and added wikilinks as well. Gavyn Sykes (talk) 15:39, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

text: Jeez, pause for breath! Thanks for editing that mass of words! Lemon Demon (talk) 01:33, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Request edit 

message: Before we get into an edit war over this, we should try and establish which move it is: Gogoplata or modified Triangle Choke? P.S. Leave Triangle Choke as a signature move as he does not finish his matches with it (including Big Daddy V and Mark Henry), this move was different. Lemon Demon (talk) 02:00, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It's a gogoplata. If you look at the article, you'll see very many similarities between that and the move the Undertaker is using, maybe with one or two minor modifications with how it's applied. Not only that, this video on Google Video of the gogoplata also shows the similarities. SanjuroHayashida (talk) 16:33, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

text: Re-added Gogoplata as a finisher, but kept triangle choke as he has used this before. Lemon Demon (talk) 02:05, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Which move was it? 

message: I'd like to request a move for this article so the title corresponds with the subject's true name, Mark William Calaway, and use The Undertaker as a redirect. This seems more reasonable to me. <3 bunny 03:10, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It should stay at The Undertaker, per WP:NAME. Gavyn Sykes (talk) 04:15, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  request move