Talk:Triple H/Archive 1

message: "The fact that Triple H lost three times in a row in a WrestleMania main event (WrestleMania XX, WrestleMania 21, and WrestleMania 22) does not support his statement, however. As wrestling outcomes are pre-determined, and as heels such as Triple H often lose main events at Wrestlemania, the outcome of such events is negligible; what truly matters is the placing of a wrestler ona card, and the promotion behind him. Triple H, despite lesser popularity than many wrestlers, is always given top billing and always has his matches/rivalries heavily promoted"
isnt that kind of POV? is it the result of the biggest main event of the year or just the fact that he is in the main event that matters?
that section is very anti HHH in my opinion Lord revan 13:04, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: POV?

message: "Levesque is described as either a ten-time or eleven-time world champion. He held the WWE Undisputed Championship when it had been consolidated by Chris Jericho but was still represented by two belts. After the two belts had been merged, he won it four more times, and had five reigns as WWF/WWE Champion. Strictly in terms of titles, the total is ten; his World Championship belts, counting both of the two for his first Undisputed Championship, total eleven."
This is stated on the page, so as the WWE see him as only ten so the top part of the artical should still remain as 10 time, and should not be changed. Paulley 15:26, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Number of title wins 

message: Is there a reference to his inclusion to :Category:Teetotalers? --Jtalledo (talk) 03:30, 21 November 2005 (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 move. —Nightstallion (?) 10:33, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Teetotaler 

message: :Add *Support or *Oppose followed by an optional one-sentence explanation, then sign your vote with ~~~~
*Support since we are voting --Lox (t,c) 13:06, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Voting

message: I deleted "*Levesque faced Mick Foley in Foley's two "retirement matches" in 2000 at the Royal Rumble and No Way Out.", because it was not factually correct. Only their match at No Way Out was considered a "Retirement" match.
Please be civil. With regards to the information you added that was deleted by someone, I agree that your information is indeed relevant to the article therefore I re-inserted it. Please remember that if a consensus has decided the information is relevant, than no ONE editor should take it upon himself to delete it out of hand. Please discuss all thoughts here. Thanks! TruthCrusader 14:14, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Trivia 

message: Can anyone tell me, why the backlash 2006 poster was deleted. I did not upload this image, however I suppose it was kinda cool to look at. I guess I can see how someone could see this as a threat to  contiuing to not show spoilers (in even this kind of way), but whatever.Jman5 04:22, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Backlash Poster 

message: This article is a frequent target for unregistered or new editors to add a week-by-week synopsis of the subject's in-ring career. This is irrelevant to an encyclopedic article. More experienced good-faith editors should watch for irrelevant additions to this article that will only serve to make it larger and harder to edit for style, clarity, and grammar. - Chadbryant 19:56, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: First of all, Assume good faith. The whole point is that anyone can edit the article and help determine what exactly is relevant. Chad is making a good faith effort to make this article comprehensive. Just chill out. :) --Jtalledo (talk) 23:15, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

text: Triple H is currently 37k in size. There are United States Presidents with articles that aren't that big. Suffice to say, an encyclopedia entry regarding a a professional wrestler (even one as prolific and influential as Hunter) probably doesn't need a week-by-week synposis of the subject's career in pretending to beat people up -  or one that subsequently balloons in size every time he pretends to beat up someone different. Bcarlson33 is right in that this isn't the only article that suffers from what some here have called "fandalism", which is why I've made several comments similar to my original size comment here on other talk pages, including the one at WP:PW. - Chadbryant 23:29, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: As far as size goes, doesn't really seem to be much of a factor. 37k is not extremely large for a professional wrestler. For example Shawn Michaels' article is 41k in size, as is Chris Benoit's, and several others. Jman5 02:47, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Article Size

message: I know they had this feud at WM 17 that HHH has beaten everybody but Taker. But has HHH ever beaten Taker since? Perry 01:04, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: HHH beat Undertaker at the UK pay-per-view Insurrextion 2002. --Oakster 14:08, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: He also beat him in a no DQ match on SmackDown in July 2000, but I'm not sure if it counts because Kurt Angle hit Taker with a sledgehammer. tv316 21:28, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Triple H vs Undertaker

message: Is it just me, or should the World Heavyweight Title and the WWF World Heavyweight title tables be merged. There one in the same, arn't they??
--Killswitch Engage 19:13, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No becouse its just a name made up by the WWE, Just like the World Series does not have teams from around the world. DXRAW 11:12, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  World Heavyweight Title 

message: ----
Hopefully i didn't screw up the facts when i rewrote the description of his titles; someone who knows what they're doing should check.
The article is about Levesque, not the combination of 4 titles, so i cut back 
: He is only the second of five wrestlers to have held all four of those titles, the first being Shawn Michaels.  
to 
: He is only the second of five wrestlers to have held all four of those titles.  
Write an article about that combo, at least listing the five holders (and their tag-team partners), and explaining why the 4 make an interesting combo, how the significance of the combo has evolved over time, & so on.  Both Levesque's and Michaels's articles should link to it.  (I'd start it but putting all 4 titles names into the article title won't fly: someone who knows a shorthand term for the combo should start it.)  That's why we have links between articles: there's no point in mentioning "Michaels did it first" in each article, if you can learn the whole story by linking to an article on that topic.
Worst case, if there's really no name for the 4-title combo, put it in an omnibus article called Combinations of fake-wrestling titles.
--Jerzy(t) 07:19, 2004 Dec 21 (UTC)
I think that it is actually called the Grandslam championship.87.112.81.177 10:20, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  4 title Combo

message: After leaving officiating the Cena Kenny Match and that akward staredown then the Shrug micheals did, was this Triple H's Face turn? Is he now a face? he has been getting fan support like a Face, now that he somewhat helped Cena retain by leaving the ring and not counting the match, could he now be called a face?
We will have to wait and see until next RAW i guess. Lord revan 19:35, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Face Turn 

message: Jericho is such a wrestler, who after lots of hard work finally got his deserved title run, only to have it stolen by a returning Triple H who hadn't step foot in a ring for eight months. When he returned he did everything in his power to bury Chris Jericho, who could have had a wonderful career.
Um, that's got to go, right?
It has been reported that there were some people backstage upset at Triple H because he was pushing for Edge to lose the title to Cena at Royal Rumble to line himself up for a title match with Cena at WrestleMania (his 3rd Wrestlemania main event in a row). Many people thought that Edge was doing very well as champion and had managed to get himself over with the fans. But his deserved reign was cut short due to Triple H's ego, who can't pass on the spotlight to someone more deserving.
Not only is it unsourced (and probably unsourceable, if that's even a word :P ) it is vehemently anti-Triple H. I realize the section is called 'Controversy' but that doesn't mean it has to become home for out-and-out attacks. Tromboneguy0186 18:22, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Major POV stuff in 'Controversy' section 

message: Is it just me, or is Triple H a lot less cut than he used to be, say 2 years or 3 years ago?  I mean he's still in great shape and all, he looks to be about the same size as he always was but he doesn't look as if he has the same level of muscular definition that he used to have.
Perhaps. I guess some of that could be contributed to the fact that he will be 37 in July.  That and with him being so involved with the booking process he just might not have as much time to devote to the gym. Basbalfrk 22:13, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Because in the WWE it usually is steroids, that's why. HHH was a huge steroid abuser (I doubt he is on them as much now). He was older in 2002 than he was in 98 obviously, and when he came back it showed that he hitting them hard. Now with the tests he doesn't use them as much. His physique came from steroids. About 90% of the WWE roster was on them a few years ago.(Halbared 20:26, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

text: And wrestlers are always 100% truthful and honest aboot their personal lives in autobios? Yeah, right.(Halbared 09:22, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

text: Why would he need a reason to lie about something like that? Read his book and you will see from early on when he was very young, he worked for what he got. He didn't try to cheat his way to a better body. Besides, what credibility do you have to accuse Triple H of steroids? Got some documented proof?--68.107.198.227 03:24, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

text: I thinks so... Batista SKRIBUL 21:24, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There have been lots of wrestlers, both past and present, that have or at least just as large. Superstar Billy Graham, Andre The Giant, The Great Khali, Scott Steiner, Ken Patera, Mark Henry, Vader, Batista, Ron Simmons, Lex Luger, etc. I mean, c'mon people, Triple H is a big guy but he's not some gargantuan freak of nature. Odin's Beard 00:55, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Physique Changes

message: Somebody needs to go and clean this up, it's like a weekly update with anything happening to him beeing added. I don't thing it needs a week by week update. TJ Spyke 02:15, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. Weekly updates are good for msg boards, not for encyclopaedias.(Halbared 14:59, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

text: If done correctly, a week-by-week addition can be useful, although so many updates on wrestling — and other mainstream current events pages, for that matter — are so poorly written I'm not sure. Eventually, I think that as feuds progress, you'll see editing and mass consolidation of feuds. IMO, I think editors need to be selective in what they contribute. [[Briguy52748 14:54, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Week-by-week additions can be useful if the correct info is given and the addition is well written. They are still not encyclopedic though. Constant updates on a current event is one thing - it's easier to go in after the event is over and summarize things. Someone's life tends to last longer than most current events though. A biography should be fairly static and should concentrate on a real-life view of the subject. --Jtalledo (talk) 11:11, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Week-by-Week Additions

message: Changed the dead zone part in TV Films and such to make it when you click the dead zone it brings you to the TV show not the book. Overlordneo 02:36, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dead Zone 

message: Triple H is really about 6'3 1/2-6'4, he's not 6'2. Son of Kong
Look at when he was face to face with a 6'6 JBL at Wrestlemania 21, he is definitely about 6'3 1/2 or 6'4. If he were only 6'2 he would've looked like a midget compared to JBL like Ric Flair but he was almost eye to eye with Triple H.
:Most wrestlers wear boots with one to two inch heels, or insert lifts into their boots to appear taller. - Chadbryant 00:59, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: And your source for that is? DXRAW 04:38, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Height 

message: For the height of Triple H. Please do not revert.(Halbared 12:18, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: His WWE profile lists him as 6'4". Even though this is a kayfabed stat, it should probably be used instead of a mean or an estimate. - Chadbryant 19:16, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: We should use only Reliable sources and wwe.com would have that. One other unreliable source that has been used is just people guessing heights. DXRAW 22:18, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  RFC (Request For Comments) 

message: Where is the source for this? DXRAW 01:06, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Real Height 

message: Was there any truth to the story that Triple H was originally supposed to resume his tag team and blueblood gimmick with Steve Regal after being signed to the WWF? I've heard that was the plan, but the World Wrestling Federation was unable to sign Regal. It's not mentioned in the article. --Jtalledo (talk) 22:20, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Regal makes no mention of that in his book, and states that he encouraged Hunter to go to the WWF. - Chadbryant 23:02, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Team with Regal in the WWF? 

message: I tagged the controversy section with  and . As per WP:BLP, attention should be paid to cite some reliable sources for negative material. Otherwise, the section can be deleted at any time. --Jtalledo (talk) 13:29, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Controversy section tagged 

message: I think that his current photo should be changed. The photo that is currently there kind looks stupid & makes HHH look like he's retarded. User:Son of Kong: Son of Kong
Its free use and is a good image. --Mikedk9109 22:21, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Photo Change 

message: Near the end of the "Early History" section, where it mentions his teaming with Steven Regal (off topic, but is that meant to be "Steven" or "William"), it states ((This partnership would be brought down by Regal in 2004 after Regal convinced Eugene to cost Triple H an Ironman Match against Chris Benoit. He left in 1995 for the World Wrestling Federation.)) Should the part with Eugene costing HHH the match even be a part of that? It makes no sense whatsoever. Cobra wwe 08:16, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Clarification Needed

message: Okay. So I clicked into Wikipedia and typed in Triple H, right? Suddenly it brings me to a page titled "Triple H" except it has William Jason (Jay) Reso instead. It didn't appear to have been moved, it just did it. I clicked off of it and came back a few times to the same effect. Finally when I clicked a link to it through google it brought me to the RIGHT Triple H page. After that it worked right no matter how I accessed it. Just thought I'd tell everyone this if they ever face the same issue. Mushrambo 00:57, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Possible Wikipedia Glitch? 

message: Should HHH be listed as an Authority Figure of Wrestling? He does control like 80% of The WWE.AD Double J 07:38, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: He doesn't hold any power officially. He may influence decisions as a voice in his wife's ear, but officially any company decision comes from one of the other McMahon family members. Of course, any influence he may hold isn't acknowledged, so the only thing that we can say, and have said in the controversy section, is that he is married to Stephanie, and is accused of using this to affect storyline decisions in his favor. Cheers, -- The Hybrid 07:55, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Which pretty much proves that he has inside power. --  Mikedk9109  (hit me up)  21:34, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Because there's no actual proof he has the power, that's proof of just how powerful he is. Outstanding reasoning Mikedk9109. BoosterBronze 17:39, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think that he was agreeing with me that what we already have in the controversy section is enough. He was saying that we can let the facts speak for themselves rather than try and explain everything. -- The Hybrid 17:44, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I see. I apologize if I misread that. Perhaps my snark was uncalled for. BoosterBronze 02:34, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Authority Figure 

message: Isn't it quite possible with the irony of the injury just sustained that it is all kayfabe and just a useful method of ending the DX reunion (already aknowledged to be a temporary reunion anyhow) and allow time for Paul to help raise his new child?  It all seems too coincidental that he would get six months for "recovery" (his first actual quad tear took him 8 months to rehab)?  After all, six months has been the standard time for a performer's extended break time with a kayfabe excuse.  I'm just not sure that the quad injury should be taken completely seriously just yet although it is also realistic that the injury could be real.  It is just that when it comes to sports entertainment, it is really difficult to tell what is real and what isn't and how to appropriately articulate it given the circumstances.  RabidPanda V 03:46, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The first one was a full quad tear while this one is only one of four tendons. DXRAW 04:07, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

text: If a reliable source says that it is a kayfabe injury, then we will say so in the article. Until then it amounts to rumor and speculation, which is inherently unencyclopedic. -- The Hybrid 11:12, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Fair enough... that's all I was really looking for.  Thanks!  RabidPanda V 14:44, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

text: I highly doubt it would be kayfabe, I mean Superstars tend to have a history of repeatidly injury certain area's of their body, especially after a few years when they become complacent of possible injury. Plus do you have a source on the D-X reunion only being temporary, because from all accounts I've heard and seen Triple H, wanted to turn face and remain that way for the rest of his active wrestling career. The Legendary One 23:45, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That is a little forumish. -- The Hybrid 23:48, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: "Forumish?"  That's sort of the purpose of the discussion page... discussion and forum are rather similar concepts, wouldn't you agree? RabidPanda V 05:23, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: See WP:TALK. "Talk pages are for discussing ways to improve the article, not general discussion of the article's subject."  What the Legendary One said was borderline, so I was just interjecting in case a debate about the injuries was going to start. -- The Hybrid 10:19, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

text: Understood... I wasn't sure where you were going with that.  Don't worry, I wasn't planning on going there.  I've seen too many times these discussion pages turning into forums for heated debates.  I had no intention of going near that line.  RabidPanda V 00:34, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Wonderful. That is really one of my pet peeves; mostly because they never solve anything when they take place. -- The Hybrid
Yeah it was my bad I was like really tired when I did it so my apologies The Legendary One 02:50, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

text: Don't be. As I said it was borderline, and I know what it is like to edit when you are tired. I pissed off a good number of people, mostly admins, when I was editing while I had pneumonia. Don't worry about it, as it is really no big deal. Really. Cheers, -- The Hybrid 04:50, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Kayfabe?