Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Professional wrestling/Archive 9

message: For some reason somebody created an article for Team RECK(instead of just adding info to the Team ECK page. It's been nominated for deletion, but I recommended it be merged with Team ECK. Here is the nomination page: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Team RECK. TJ Spyke 05:03, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Team_RECK]] 

message: Why did he retire? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.111.216.36 (talk • contribs) .
:He's still around. See Special:Contributions/Moe Epsilon. --Jtalledo (talk) 23:04, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, now he is. --Jtalledo (talk) 16:54, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  What happened to Moe epsilon? 

message: Please go to this page and support the move. It's supposed to be Clash of the Champions, but for some reason it's at Clash of Champions. TJ Spyke 01:59, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Clash of Champions]] 

message: While I have faith in my own ability to start articles, I think it'd be helpful if someone took a look at it if they have a moment. I'm also not too sure if this or "ROH Survival of the Fittest" or something else altogether would be the best title for the article. Thanks. Tromboneguy0186 05:10, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Survival of the Fittest (wrestling)]] 

message: Shouldn't the preformers on the WWE Roster/PPV's have nicknames as the TNA preformers on there roster/PPV's?
BionicWilliam 05:59, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't know about WWE/ROH, but nicknames are pretty important in TNA - wrestlers such as Abyss, Ron Killings and Monty Brown are always introduced as "Nickname" Wrestler. On the TNA website, some wrestlers are actually listed by their nicknames, not their ring names, so it makes sense to include them. McPhail 23:21, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

text: Well, for the WWE roster page, we should definately add HBK's and Shannon Moore's nicknames, as those are part of those gimmicks (The fact that Shawn Michaels is regularly refered to as HBK should say something).  As for others on the WWE roster, doubt it.  Duggan and Lawler already have their nicknames included.  --Dubhagan 23:52, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

text: On last weeks ECW show, the promo for Shannon Moore called him "The Reject" Shannon Moore.  --Dubhagan 00:05, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Roster Help

message: Was tagged for speedy - she seems to have won three titles according to the article. KillerChihuahua?!? 18:58, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Article help: [[Griffin O'Reilly]]

message: Go here: . The basic problem is: the constant reverting of a comedy relief section.  Comedy relief isn't a big part of jobbing, but WillC somehow thinks it is (just because of a few past comedy jobbing, plus the recent ECW jobbers: Nacho Libre, Zombie, etc). I can understand a small note about comedy in the gimmicks section, but not a full on section for something that small (and not very notable either). RobJ1981 20:33, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's still going on, anytime it gets changed, he reverts it back to how he wrote it. Can some people from here post over there and help out? RobJ1981 17:48, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You are going to have to get arbitration then....my edits are factual...I gave you three examples. That's enough to start. Stop your vendetta. WillC 19:33, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

text: I didn't want to create a new tab, but the comic relief section is still being added and WillC is still insistant that it should be kept, saying that "consensus has been reached", when I cannot find anyone supporting him or sayiing that the section should be kept. I don't think we should give in, the section does not belong, he needs to stop and maybe be banned for awhile. --Renosecond 19:10, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Issue at Job page

message: I have been talking to Tj Spyke  This is a suggestion You might want to have summaries of the matches at the event they occured.  People would like to have more info inragards of the matches.  I have been watching wrestling for over 30 years.  Been to matches and know somw wrestlers as well.  I have been surfing the dirt sheets for over 10 years.  So please treat me with respect and blow a gasket(3bulletproof16) — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheTruth2 (talk • contribs) 
:TheTruth2 has been reported. If you would like to leave a comment concerning the situation please do so here. I find it strange that when he is referred to Wikipedia:WikiProject Professional wrestling show formatting or any other guideline for that matter, he claims that he has already read them and that his edits "still follows the guidelines". --3bulletproof16 22:19, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: And you still have done nothing to summarize the section as per Wikipedia:WikiProject Professional wrestling show formatting. And again read the Guidelines... A 3RR report can only be filed if the reversions occurred more than 4 times within a 24 hour period. The last reversion I did was 4 minutes After the 24 hour period. Read and learn... This isn't about getting more people to visit a website this about writing an encyclopedia. Wikipedia is not a soapbox And this time really read it instead of claiming you did just to shut the people referring you to the guideline up. --3bulletproof16 22:23, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

text: The format that should be used is on the project page.  It just says to post the result, that is it, not to go into second by second detail about the match.  That format was agreed to by EVERYONE that's apart of this project.  If you have a problem with it, talk about it here, but don't go making changes in the articles until this matter is resolved.  While I see your edits as being done in good faith, others might not agree, since it goes against an already agreed upon format.  --Dubhagan 22:47, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. You stick to the format. I don't agree with some formatting, but I abide by the consensus, as should everyone.(Halbared 22:52, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Summary of matches 

message: We really need some continuity on this, I just went through the TNA roster page and removed several of the nicknames since TNA didn't list them at the top of their profile pages.  I think we need to see what their full ring name is listed as on their article page here (Some nicknames are part of ring names, some aren't), and also see what TNA and WWE list their full ring names as, and see how they are introduced when they come to the ring.  If there is a discrepency, we can descuss it on the individual roster talk pages or that wrestler's talk page.  --Dubhagan 01:17, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Nicknames aren't a big deal, in my opinion. The regular names should be listed always, if you ask me. RobJ1981 02:10, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Though some nicknames are a part of their ring name.  --Dubhagan 19:25, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nicknames on roster pages 

message: WCW Disney tapings and Rec.sport.pro-wrestling both need third party participation due to edit warring. Johntex is looking at Rec.sport.pro-wrestling at the moment. Tyrenius 02:11, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Protected pages

message: I'm thinking about getting an edit bot to allow us to change Spinebuster slam to simple Spinebuster. The bots needed because the number of wrestling pages that link to spinebuster slam are huge due to how common the move is, however on every wrestling page it is linked to as simply spinebuster. Does anyone know how we go about getting a bot to edit Spinebuster slam to Spinebuster? --- Lid 07:17, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Try to request one at Wikipedia:Bot requests. --Jtalledo (talk) 09:49, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks i'll see how that goes --- Lid 10:01, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Got an edit bot, now all cases of Spinebuster slam links are being directed properly to Professional wrestling throws#Spinebuster. Don't change it back to slam as the link is now dead. --- Lid 20:32, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I just wanted to post here to confirm that the job should be done. Feel free to contact me if I missed something or you need further help. alphaChimp laudare 23:13, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  What needs to be done to get a wikipedia edit bot? 

message: User:Sivazh has put in the section header "In wrestling" to many articles on wrestlers. I saw Jtalledo revert one edit based on the the fact this section header isn't appropriate on Wikipedia and Paulley left him a note to not do it to articles that don't need it, but he's still doing it. Even as I speak, he's still doing it. He's done it to hundreds of articles, and I think they all have to be reverted. ErikNY 22:10, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, it's a pain in the arse, I have loads of pages on watch, but dunno if they have all been caught...it's tiring.(Halbared 13:02, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

text: This person has been adding some odd manager list entries too. Ah well. --Jtalledo (talk) 20:10, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: User:Sivazh needs to stop some of your changes, we stoped adding subsections to "in wrestling/wrestling facts" section along time ago opting for the bullet point/bolding. As for "championship succession" until we remove it completally it should remain a subsection championships and accomplishment --- Paulley 09:20, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: In wrestling

message: I have looked but have not found the date that Rob Van Dam won the WWE belt one night on RAW from the Undertaker...it must have been 2002?? It is a similar situation to when Benoit/Jericho and others have won the belt. The decision was quashed, the match restarted. It would be nice to have it in the List of WWE Champions for it to be complete.(Halbared 13:05, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Those title reigns didn't count, they certainly shouldn't be listed in WWE champions. RobJ1981 17:30, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I didn't say they were. And those championships don't count, the WWE don't count them, but the other quasi-titles changes are noted, I think this one should be too.(Halbared 22:27, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

text: Which title changes are noted?  I know of the Antonio Inoki title change (which WWE hasn't  acknowledged ever), but other than that. I don't see any. Maybe a note of not recognized champs would be acceptable, but in the regular list, I don't see it helping. Inoki's reign shouldn't be on the list, in my opinion. RobJ1981 22:36, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think it should either, and I am gonna change it when I can get round to it, but I am talking aboot the lil paragraphs between the reigns. I know these are not reigns, I understand that. I am talking aboot the times (moslty recently for ratings) where the title changes hands only for it not to be upheld.(Halbared 22:58, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You mean things like when Jericho "won" the title from Triple H only to have it negated? I don't see any reason for those to be included. Things like Flair "losing" the title to Carlos Colon are noteable for other reasons(Flair never lost the title but allowed Colon to pin him to avoid upsetting the crowd in Puerto Rico). TJ Spyke 00:06, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: So if no-one has any objections I'll remove the titles changes that were never upheld/never recognised?{Halbared 11:52, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

text: The list of hardcore champions has a small list of disputed reigns. I don't know if that means anything to this issue but I think it's worth mentioning that that title has a list of them. Normy132 02:28, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

text: The disputed Hardcore Title reigns are because Mick Foley and Edge brought out the title and declared themselves co-champions. WWE had not acknowledged the title as revived and Foley/Edge have only mentioned it a handful of times since then. TJ Spyke 03:37, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: WWE title reigns that weren't

message: After getting into some trouble on the SNME results page I was pointed to the fact that we now have an official format for show results. When was this one (with all the bullets) decided on over this one? Was there a discussion on it? The one with all the bullets just looks sloppy, in my opinion. Bdve 20:19, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There was a discussion about whether to use bullets, headings or breaks in match results page and the consensus was using bullets. Normy132 02:29, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Results pages format

message: I noticed in the cleanup section that there was a suggestion to "Add commas to lists in statsboxes", I think that they look fairly awkward and maybe they should be reconsidered. Personally, I think there should only be a comma if the name takes more than one line. Thoughts? --Quotes22 23:50, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree, they do look awkward in boxes usually. I'm against commas in the stats boxes. I hope it does get reconsidered. RobJ1981 04:53, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I have to agree. Only have commas if a name is longer than 1 line. TJ Spyke 05:29, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

text: I'm agreeing with this as well. It does look quite awkward. Give this discussion until August 3 and if there are no complaints about this proposition I reckon make the change as well as making a note of it on the WP:PW main page. Normy132 10:57, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

text: Well, I'm going to change the to-do box and make it to remove the commas, hope that is alright. --Renosecond 19:00, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: "Add commas to lists in statsboxes"

message: Here is the article: . As you can see, the name of the article is a bit long. John doesn't look to be too notable either. What does everyone think? RobJ1981 13:07, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Looks like is should be deleted - the subject doesn't look notable. --Jtalledo (talk) 13:13, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Honest John article: delete or rename?

message: In my opinion it's not very notable. I've been in a recent edit war, because a person keeps removing my prod deletion notice...and won't realize it's NOT very notable and really doesn't need an article. RobJ1981 13:46, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd merge with the related PPV article.  --Dubhagan 02:52, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: [[King of the Road Match]]: keep or delete?

message: I recently expanded on the Magnum Tokyo entry and re-formatted it to adhere to the guidelines provided in this project's main page.  However, not having had much exposure to his Japanese work other than a handful of Dragon Gate matches, the best I could do was provide a summary of his work in WCW (which was very brief and only lasted a few months in 1998) and therefore I've left the disclaimer stating that the article was a stub.  Since he hasn't seemed to be active in North America since '98, finding information about him through Google turned up very little, and the official Dragon Gate website unfortunately doesn't have an English version that I could find..  Is there anyone out there familiar enough with his work in Japan (in particular Dragon Gate) that could expand on what's already there?  Additionally, if you have a picture to upload that you're certain would meet Wikipedia guidelines concerning copyright and fair usage, feel free to do so.--Deputy Marshall 14:04, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Try this website []. It should give you all the information you need. Stephen Day 21:52, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Article Help: [[Magnum Tokyo]]

message: I came across this page when removing several edits to numerous movelists relating to a Draven Cage. Near as I can tell the federation is real (http://members.lycos.co.uk/lwleague/news.html) but notability seems to be non-existant. I just want to double check here before putting it up for AfD. --- Lid 15:50, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Its very non-notable, and should be deleted.  RobJ1981 17:06, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Delete [[Draven Cage]]? 

message: I reverted these edits since it just relist info from List of WWE pay-per-view events. 
BionicWilliam 03:32, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: PPV Listings on RAW & SD! Page

message: I can you help settle a dispute? 
My Source for here name being Torrie Anne Gruner {née Wilson) is
The Anon has produce no source and trying to pass them self as Mrs. Gruner herself.
BionicWilliam 03:32, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Torrie Wilson]] Full Name Dispute

message: On Dave Finlay there is a user, User:Mikedk9109, who keeps changing Finlay's finisher from Air Raid Crash to Kryptonite Krunch. His argument is that it's under the KK banner and that the ARC name is applied incorrectly as part of the paragraph states the name ARC is used incorrectly when referring to a KK. The problem is Finlay DOES perform an ARC as it goes across the back from one shoulder to opposte arm instead of straight down to the same arm. I've tried to explain this repeatedly but he keeps reverting me, even when I list examples of other articles that link to KK as ARC because they aren't KK, they're ARC's.
The CM Punk page has recently suffered a similar problem with users changing the Anaconda Vice name to variations of "Guillotine Choke/Key Lock Combo" which is the name listed on the WWE.com website, which is an unbelievable non-reliable website for move names but as of right now no one has changed it to that again and Anaconda Vice is the name he's used for the last 3 years. 
Just bringing these to peoples attention and hoping for some aid. --- Lid 09:51, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Dave Finlay]] and [[CM Punk]] 

message: His page name needs changing, as that name was his OVW ring name, but not his current SD! name.  Not sure what to though.  His real name appears to be Aaron Haddad, but I'm not 100% sure on that.  His current SD! name, as you will see tonight, is Idol Stevens.  We could also change it back to Aaron Stevens (wrestler).  Thoughts?  --James Duggan 21:30, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Aaron Haddad pulls up no exact matches to the wrestler except this Wikipedia article. First I suggest moving the article back to Aaron Stevens (wrestler) considering he doesn't have nearly enough popularity to have a name change like that. Next, change his name back to Aaron Stevens because of every other verified source. 216.78.95.111 23:09, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Aaron "The Idol" Stevens]] 

message: A new user, User:WWEFan1337, has "moved" List of professional wrestling throws to Professional wrestling throws. I say "moved" because the history shows it's not a move but rather a copy paste of the information thus losing the history. If you will recall I posted a topic a while back on this due to that nearly all pages link to Professional wrestling throws rather than List of and asked if we should move the page. If I remember correctly at the time we reached no consensus so my question right now is do we move the page back or do we get an admin to move the history of List of to Professional? --- Lid 19:08, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've reversed it, you don't need an admin for that, it's basically reverting.  Someone might want to leave a message for that user about proper policy.  --James Duggan 21:33, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I was referring to an admin on the query of even though what he did was against policy by bypassing the project, my question was a rehash of the previous topic: Should it be moved to fall in line with the other pages? --- Lid 22:26, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This page should help explain.  --James Duggan 22:31, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Lists is listed by definition of largely consisting of links to other pages, while this pages are rather closer to mini-articles and definitions. --- Lid 22:34, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Your right, it should be at Professional wrestling throws, for consistency with the pages Professional wrestling holds, Professional wrestling attacks, Professional wrestling aerial techniques, and Professional wrestling double-team maneuvers.  --James Duggan 22:24, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Should we set up a vote here to decide? --- Lid 23:04, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unsanctioned move/copy paste 

message: There are many people on Wikipedia who aren't wrestling fans and have been deleting wrestling articles because there aren't enough wrestling fans to outvote them.  If you want proof, read the comments on McMahonism's deletion page from non-fans and look at what they did to WWE Development Wrestler Victoria Crawford's page.  While I agree McMahonism was unworthy of an article, the fact is that there are people on Wikipedia who vote for wrestling articles to be deleted solely because "wrestling is fake."  I think we'd be able to create a better Wrestling Encyclopedia by forking this Wikiproject into a Wiki.  I personally have a web hosting account with enough bandwidth for the time being and could set it up.  Since we'd make the policies of the Wiki, not other people, we'd be able to do alot more with the articles.  There's people here on Wikipedia who believe that a wrestler has to be a big name before he/she warrants an article.  I feel there are too many people on Wikipedia that are not wrestling fans but are marking wrestler articles up for deletion.  Recently, the wrestling business sim Extreme Warfare, which is very popular and well-known among most of the online wrestling fans, has been targeted for deletion.  While every attempt to get that article deleted failed, people keep trying.  I am concerned about this problem and we either need to vote in a policy to prevent this from continuing, vote down all the attempts, or fork off from Wikipedia.  I'm for forking off of Wikipedia because I think we won't be able to make a decent guide to wrestling on Wikipedia because of the anti-Wrestling people.  Could you imagine what would happen if somebody attempted to delete a Pro Football player article?  That wouldn't happen to the same extent with wrestling because we're almost always too busy or just too few in number to keep wrestling articles on Wikipedia. 205.166.61.142 13:16, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Lots of non-notable footballer players don't have articles, also there have been previous attempts for wrestling wikis but none have survived as long or have been as comprehensive as the WikiProject on Wikipedia. --- Lid 13:56, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

text: I believe someone created a Wrestlepedia a while back. I personally think there's way too many articles on professional wrestlers and aspects of professional wrestling and some of the articles (particularly WWE-related ones) ones get really cluttered and mired in kayfabe. A major professional wrestling wiki would be good, something like Wookiepedia or Memory Alpha, but for all the details and minutiae of pro wrestling. Remember, Wikipedia is a general interest encyclopedia, so pro wrestling articles here should be of general interest or at least be accessible to people who aren't into pro wrestling as well. --Jtalledo (talk) 19:26, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Found one here, but that's not the one I'm thinking of.  --James Duggan 05:00, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Found it here.  --James Duggan 05:02, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I started mine long ago. http://www.wrestlepedia.org Add whatever you like.  I have no limits at this time...  Wikipedia Rules apply to everyting. - NickSentowski 19:48, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stay on Wikipedia or create our own Wiki? 

message: Should we merge the article on King Booker's Court into Booker Huffman? It looks like their alliance was loose at best and since Regal and Finlay seem to have parted ways, it doesn't look like they will ever be a full time stable. --Jtalledo (talk) 19:31, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[King Booker's Court]] 

message: The page has a list of all the results ever (from the looks of it). It looks sloppy and in my opinion, not needed. I can understand a list of highlights or something of that sort, but not a whole list. What does everyone else think? RobJ1981 04:28, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[TNA Xplosion]] 

message: In reference to the entry on the 1990s wrestling boom which was on the agenda for articles to be created, I've been working on the edit on and off for a couple days now after what it was before (wrought with spelling/grammatical errors and pretty short).  Let me know what you guys think, and if there's anything else that should be on there (or shouldn't be on there).  --Deputy Marshall 15:55, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Needs more ECW. They can easily be added around the "Attitude era" section considering how much of Attitude was ECW-centric. Other than that, looks good. Bdve 18:36, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Where does it say the Attitude Era ended with Wrestlemania X7?  And what heel turn are you referring to? And the buyout was a major contributor to the end of the Wrestling Boom.  I think you're confusing the singular "Attitude Era" in the WWF/WWE with the 90s Wrestling Boom in general. Deputy Marshall 21:14, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Couldn't one argue that the "Attitude Era" ended when they changed from WWF to WWE?  Isn't that when they changed logos to get rid of the "Attitude" that was in the logo?  And I agree it's not the same as the "Wrestling Boom". -- Davetron5000 21:24, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If thats the case then the Attitude Era ended exactly at Backlash 2002 not WrestleMania X8 -- 3:16 21:41, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

text: BionicWilliam, I edited your links to the article. I agree that between that, the "Boom" article and the Monday Night Wars article there is a lot of duplication.  I think the best would be to trim the info out of History of professional wrestling and merge it with the "Boom" article and have it referenced from the history article.  This will keep the history one from getting to be too big and hopefully cut down on some duplication. -- Davetron5000 21:56, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: [[1990s wrestling boom]]

message: The Criticisms of the Brand Extension section needed to be revised or removed, since it's is not NPOV, plus their no source to this section. Most of it is Opinon.
BionicWilliam 23:55, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: [[WWE Brand Extension]] [[Wikipedia:NPOV dispute]]

message: Can somebody in the UK(or someone familiar with it) tell me if Sky Movies + and Sky Sports are PPV channels over there? This has to do with WWF/E. I was under the impression that the first UK only PPV was One Night Only in 1997. TJ Spyke 05:06, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The first UK exclusive pay-per-view event was One Night Only in 1997 and was shown on Sky Box Office, BSkyB's pay-per-view service. Prior to that, there were UK events (see here) but were shown on Sky One, Sky Movies, and Sky Sports, which are all not pay-per-view channels. In fact, I should really correct the WWE pay-per-view page and note them as supercards rather than pay-per-view events. --Oakster (Talk) 16:56, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  British PPV's 

message: Hi, been on Wikipedia for a while now and edit a few stuff but haven't really touched the wrestling articles.  I like how they are set up but feel that there should really be a distinction between "real world" and "kayfabe" events.  A lot of the wrestling articles do not make that distinction at all, making it look rather a mess.  For example most wrestling articles mention how the wrestlers got into wrestling, then proceed to describe all storylines they were involved in as if it was real.  I noticed that Jackie Gayda has a "kayfabe" notice like this:
Maybe this should be applied to ALL of the wrestling bio articles? 
Good work though, love reading it all, especially as I completely missed the peak of the "Attitude" and "Monday Night Wars" era Smoothy 13:23, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think what would be better would be if the bios are written in such a way to make clear what is kayfabe and what isn't, or even a kayfabe start/end thing like what is done with spoilers. --Davetron5000 13:54, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't really like the tag - it just excuses sub-par writing for articles. If an article is well-written (as these articles should be), it should make the distinction between reality and storylines without need for this tag. --Jtalledo (talk) 09:46, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've been trying my best to find articles with the tag and re-write them noting the differences between Kayfabe and real life when needed. - Bdve 14:56, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wrestling article editing 

message: Is it definite that the pure title is now a thing of the past? Are we sure that Danielson isn't going to just hold both and defend them separately? Tromboneguy0186 21:22, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not entirely sure.  Ring of Honor hasn't made it all that clear (yet), and I haven't read anything to suggest that the Pure Title has been completely absorbed into the World Title (other than speculation of course).  I imagine within the week we should know.  Deputy Marshall 02:22, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: All the reports on the ROH website say the titles have been unified, but I don't think that's enough unless ROH says so. I just hope if it is a real unification and not a fake one like in boxing(where they are still seperate titles but just held by the same person). TJ Spyke 04:13, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  ROH title unification 

message: There's an anon. user who keeps changing his height to 6'9", even though all sources provided say 6'7".  I was wondering if I could have some help dealing with him.  --James Duggan 23:40, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Drew Hankinson]] 

message: As per Unsanctioned move/copy paste a move vote has been initiated by myself on List of professional wrestling throws to Professional wrestling throws at Talk:List of professional wrestling throws. Your votes and opinions would be appreciated. --- Lid 00:16, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I read WP:LIST and that page doesn't really fit the description of a list page since each item has a description with it.  No other list page I've seen does that, they just list the items, usually items with a page of their own, which the items on this page don't have, if that makes any sense.  --James Duggan 00:32, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry I should've noted this was just a notice of the move. Actual votes for the move go at Talk:List of professional wrestling throws#Requested move --- Lid 00:48, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh, I realize that, I just wanted to provide some info on how Wikipedia defines lists.  It wasn't a vote.  --James Duggan 01:01, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move vote for [[List of professional wrestling throws]] 

message: This article is up for deletion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of TNA X Division Champions by age. I personally think the article should stay and think the people voting against it are not wrestling fans and that's why they are voting to delete. I voted to keep it, but I am the only one so far. TJ Spyke 21:01, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I see myself disagreeing there, other pages do have a by age listing and but I think they should be removed as well as only the oldest and youngest ones really matter and they can be incorporated into the article. --- Lid 21:09, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I have to agree with the previous two replies.  I fail to see why such a list would be necessary at all.  Deputy Marshall 04:45, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

text: I also agree. There's no need for something like that. Normy132 07:55, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[List of TNA X Division Champions by age]] 

message: Hey everyone. Is there any interest in getting pages started up for professional wrestling in the United States and professional wrestling in Canada similar to professional wrestling in Australia and professional wrestling in the United Kingdom? Normy132 08:17, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Professional wrestling worldwide 

message: Lately, there have been quite a few anons removing the word "heavyweight" from the title's page, the defenses page, and Bryan Danielson's page. I left comment tags at the top of all three asking them not to do this, since  states that "ROH World Heavyweight Championship" is the correct name of the belt. I also left a pretty detailed explanation on Talk: ROH World Heavyweight Championship. I doubt it'll stop, so be aware. Tromboneguy0186 23:58, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  ROH World Heavyweight Championship 

message: Someone created an article about Randy Baer, also known as RD Reynolds, the creator of wrestlecrap.com. I'm not questioning whether he deserves an article (although I'd lean toward not, it would be a lost cause to try anyway), but most of the article is about his various exploits in small indy feds. It comes off as vanity and self-promotion and (especially the intro) it isn't really written in a NPOV. In fact, I think maybe RD wrote it himself, considering the user name of who is editing is similar to captain crunch, the cereal, which RD claims to be a fan of according to his radio show. What should we do about this article? It needs some kind of tweaking, the indy feds he is in are barely above backyard feds. Burgwerworldz 00:56, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not sure, he may deserve an article under being a published author. --- Lid 01:35, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That's just it, if you put his article up for deletion, it would probably not work since he "technically" co-wrote 2 books. I don't think he should have an article either, personally. If he didn't have a book published, it would be speedied. But still, the content is a little bothersome, it borders on violating WP:VAIN and just talks about his time in a few minor indy feds. Any help would be appreciated. Burgwerworldz 02:35, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Randy Baer/RD Reynolds page 

message: *Recently while checking the new pages, several pages for NCW Northern Championship Wrestling (Canada promotion) wrestlers have popped up. In my opinion they aren't very notable. The NCW page shouldn't even exist, if you ask me. Granted NCW has been around a while, that doesn't mean alot. Lots of indy feds exist for a while, that certainly doesn't make them notable. I'm not saying Wikipedia should just be for the most known promotions... all I'm saying is there really doesn't need to be a page for each and every wrestler for some Canada promotion that doesn't appear to be that notable.  RobJ1981 01:33, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I suggest nominating most of them for deletion. They don't really seem notable, even the organization seems to not be very notable. TJ Spyke 02:38, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

text: You might also want to check List of independent circuit, non-affiliated or retired wrestlers for any non-notable additions.  --James Duggan 02:49, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: A wave of new wrestler articles

message: *With 605 (from my last count) it's way too big: []. Anyone care to help me out with them?  Many look to be non-notable wrestlers and should be easily deleted. While others just need much more information. Some subcategories wouldn't hurt either. Things like tag teams/groups, titles and shows could be possible subcats. RobJ1981 22:33, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I suggested a professional wrestler bio stub a while back. We should really look to delete/merge some of these articles. --Jtalledo (talk) 01:26, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've created  and Cat:Professional wrestling people stubs and I've listed the two on WikiProject Stub Sorting's To Do list. --Jtalledo (talk) 11:29, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Was this ever proposed there?  I can find no mention it anywhere in the WP:WSS archives.  The stub guidelines indicate that new stub types should be suggested at WP:WSS/P for discussion for a week before their creation.  It's a little non-plussing for something to appear on our "to do" list seemingly out of nowhere.  Alai 01:55, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Pro Wrestling stubs

message: I noticed that a lot of the wrestler pages are getting kayfabe disclaimer tags. I don't like this tag at all. It's effectively an excuse to keep the quality of writing, specifically the need to distinguish fact from fiction, at a poor standard. In addition, putting it an the beginning of the article is a huge eyesore. We should focus on improving the quality of the writing in the articles, not excusing its lapses with a note. --Jtalledo (talk) 10:30, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree, I've never liked the kayfabe tag as it seems to serve no purpose other than a WRESTLING IS FAKE notice. It also leads credence to, as you mentioned, sloppy writing without explanation. I would be happier if the entire tag was done away with or at the very list get its usage reviews so it doesn't cover most of the tops of articles. --- Lid 10:40, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm actually thinking of listing it for TFD. Professional wrestling fans already understand the nature of kayfabe so it's redundant to mention it to them, while even non-fans think that professional wrestling is "fake". The remaining people that might get confused would be better served if the article was tagged with  or  and cleaned up. --Jtalledo (talk) 13:39, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

text: I would support a deletion, somebody is going around and adding it to a bunch of wrestling articles. I removed it from the Mark Henry article but someone put it back. TJ Spyke 22:36, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: A few months ago, I modded the template so it was in the form of a cleanup tag for articles and sections which are either written to make it seem that fictional events are real, or for worked shoots which are too hard to distinguish from real life --LBMixPro <Speak|on|it!> 07:54, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I nominated it for deletion. Articles would be better served if they were cleaned up to distinguish fact and fiction. --Jtalledo (talk) 11:57, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Kayfabe disclaimer additions 

message: I figured that other people who edit wrestling articles might want to take note of this.  It seems to have slipped under this wikiproject's radar. Night Gyr (talk/Oy) 17:01, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's not looking good for the article, but if it does pull through we're going to have to make it a project project and revamp it to look more like the WWE alumni page with the table that has stage name/real name/release date/notes. - Bdve 21:46, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's a bad deletion attempt, List and Categoried are 2 different things. I voted to keep it and think others should too. TJ Spyke 01:56, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[World Championship Wrestling alumni]] up for deletion