Talk:Rob Van Dam/Archive 1

message: Rob is married to a woman named Sonya but nobody metions her.
:Why?
maybe she doesnt want him too?
maybe, but I think it is damn personal if he did so.
:On ECW One Night Stand 2, he ran up to his wife on the balcony after he won the title. She had black hair and even Joey Styles mentioned that it was his wife. I don't know they removed that on the DVD or not. Just thought that I'd mention this.  SilentRage 04:40, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Methinks you misheard. "Fuck him up *wrestler* fuck him up" is a common ECW chant. Koberulz 11:16, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  What about his Wife? 

message: "Van Dam has appeared as an extra in several of his half-brother Jean Claude's movies." Jean Claude Van Damme isn't related to Rob. SilentRage 01:36, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: How does that disqualify them from being half-brothers? Koberulz 11:16, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Relations 

message: It's lame to list the "Money in the Bank" as a championship. It's not a championship; it's a privilege. You can make a slight case because it's defended on occassion but it shouldn't be listed under titles. BTC316 00:42, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If I'm not mistaken, the Wikipedia Pro Wrestling project made it that way, and they are the ones who have real jurasdiction over how the wrestling articles are formattted.  SilentRage 00:57, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Championships 

message: I removed this for now, as all the information contained within was speculation. Once Raw airs tonight, then the section can be re-added with confirmed information. 71.245.144.10 00:43, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  WWE Title Reign section 

message: Would RVD now be known as an Undisputed Champion now that he holds two World Titles? GunFactor007 20:30, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You obviously don't understand the point of being "undisputed" champion. Being undisputed doesn't mean holding more than one title, it means that you are the ONLY champion of the calibur in whatever sport it is that you are champion in. In this case it's WWE wrestling, and Heavyweight titles. If he had the SmackDown!'s World Heavyweight title, then hew would be the Undisputed Champ, as there would be no other world champions in WWE. Hope that helps  SilentRage 01:00, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh, oops.  Sheesh man, ya don't have to get all worked up, I was just wondering about this issue that's all.  And I kinda forgot about SmackDown! too. GunFactor007 21:29, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not even sure he's has two championships, I think he may only have two belts looking at the OFFICIAL ECW World Heavyweight Championship history .  So you should get rid of all the references to holding two world titles etc.
--Trick man01 08:55, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

text: It's most likely that RVD is currently classified as both ECW and WWE Champion. This will most likely be shown to light following Vengeance and it's outcome. Blacklist 07:01, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

text: WWE just hasn't updated the title history yet. They do consider him the ECW Champion, they even mention it in the preview for tonight's episode of "ECW on Sci Fi": In tag team action, ECW World Heavyweight Champion Rob Van Dam and Kurt Angle will face WWE's Randy Orton and Edge tonight at 10/9 CT on the Sci Fi Channel. TJ Spyke 23:01, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Incase you didn't notice today they only renamed the WWE Championship the ECW championship. The Ring announcer never mentioned thh WWE title period.--12.179.230.219 03:15, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: WWE refers to him as WWE Champion and ECW Champion. This was in their preview for tonight's episode of ECW on Sci Fi: "Tonight on Sci Fi, the world will get to see an inter-promotional tag team dream match that could only happen in ECW. WWE and ECW World Heavyweight Champion Rob Van Dam will team up with the Wrestling Machine Kurt Angle to take on the WWE’s Randy Orton and the Rated-R Superstar Edge. TJ Spyke 05:23, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Undisputed Champion?

message: It's very clearly pertinent to the information that's already there. I don't want to hear some stupid "But how will anyone tell if it's part of kayfabe?!" argument, provided you have a brain you can make that distinction. As it is, the information is presented (jobbing of both the titles) and THEN explained, a good ways down the page. Tromboneguy0186 03:30, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Include drug arrest in WWE/ECW (3.3) subheading? 

message: I started a discussion on the ECW brand world title and where to put it is at the Pro Wrestling WikiProject talk page. Until a consensus has been reached please nobody move it again. --Bdve 16:10, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  That damn World Title 

message: Apparently, the store has closed so wouldn't that be a thing to add?
It says nothing of a Closing on The 5 Star Comics Web site
--Mikedk9109 02:42, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Closure of 5*Comics 

message: Should those two moves really be bold as if they are finisher? I don't think I have seen Van Dam end a match with those moves. So just like the Rolling Thunder shouldnt be bolded even though he uses it in most every match either should these two moves.
:He's definately finished matches with the Van Daminator and Van Terminator in ECW, and even if not it falls under the same label as Roderick Strong's Half nelson backbreaker. --- Lid 23:52, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Van Daminator and Van Terminator

message: I put the diving leg drop in as RVDs finisher, and it was reversed back to the old 1! He finished his tag match with Sabu with the diving leg drop, and several tag matches in the past w/ Sabu in ECW with that very leg drop. It should be included into the finishers!!TJ Sparks 03:35, Sept. 21, 2006 (UTC)
:He doesn't use the diving leg drop as a finisher, he and Sabu as a tag team used Stereo Diving leg drops as a finisher, and that tag move has been noted in the page for the team of RVD and SabuSevenzeroone 20:36, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hey, why was my change to the page reverted? 

message: Aren't Chair Surf and Skateboard the exact same move ,Running Dropkick with a steel chair into an opp seated in a turnbuckle. So why are they listed as two separate moves --Wally787 09:22, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chair Surf and Skate board 

message: Should we still refer to it as "Hollywood Star Press"? I mean, the last few years I've seen RVD in action, I haven't heard the commentators of his match refer to his split legged moonsault, so should we still refer to it as such? Or just call it what it is: Split legged moonsault?TJ Sparks 09:23am, Nov. 22, 2006 (UTC)
:If it was once called that then it has to stay. Even though it isn't referred to that anymore it still has to stay. --  Mikedk9109  (talk)  19:10, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  About the split legged moonsault 

message: I named it so because on the Rolling Thunder page, it says: "A rolling thunder refers to the action of a forward roll towards an opponent using the complete rotation to spring up onto their feet and into the air and perform an attack." and "Though Van Dam doesn't call his move anything more than "Rolling Thunder" most other variations use a naming system of Rolling Thunder [attack name]." On the list, it was set up as "Forward roll into corner monkey flip", so I thought that the forward roll in the rolling thunder, and since Konnan's move is a Rolling Thunder Lariat, and a leg drop version of the rolling thunder exists, so why not call this move a Rolling Thunder Monkey Flip. You can revert it if you want back to what it once was, but I just thought it would be the appropriate classification for the move. There can also be a consensus for this as well if you wish. --TJ Sparks 09:28, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why I named a move  "Rolling Thunder Monkey Flip" 

message: In a move list, when you put a move like "Hard DDT/Mega DDT/Jokers DDT" and such, shouldn't the current name of the move be bolded and be in front? --TJ Sparks 01:39, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  I've asked this question before, and i'm asking again 

message: Ive seen wrestler pages on wikipedia where the wrestler has a move he doesn't use anymore. For instance: Edge. Edge doesn't use "Downward Spiral" (Modified reverse STO) anymore in any way, shape, or form. I understand this is an encyclopedia, and it must be mentioned. Understandable. However, on the RVD page, the Split-legged moonsault/Hollywood star press RVD has on the list he does NOT use as a finisher anymore. Not since his days in WCW has he used it as a finisher. Due to this fact, should split legged moonsault STILL be bolded? Isn't it one of his signature moves now? Shouldn't it be italicized rathar than bolded? --James Maxx 04:24, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: WP:PW guidelines say that a move never looses its highest status. If it was used as a finisher for a length of time, it will always be bolded as a finisher. Like you said, Edge used the downward spiral for a time as a signature move, and since this is an encyclopedia and it must be mentioned. The same goes for finishers; he used it as his finishing move for a length of time, and that must be mentioned. Cheers, -- THLRCCD 04:33, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  About the move names 

message: I modeled the way I wrote up the split legged moonsault the same way Dragon Whip is written up in Shelton Benjamin's page, where Dragon Whip is bolded, and the previous names are italicized and non bolded. I also separated the finishers from the signature moves. James Maxx 18:26, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Other than separating the groups, it sounds like Shelton's page has some formatting errors. The Dragon whip shouldn't be formatted that way. -- THLR 22:07, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reason for my edit to the move list 

message: Are the moves "Springboard moonsault" and "Legsweep" worth mentioning in the move list? --James Maxx 02:22, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  About two moves... 

message: I Dont know how nobody has realized this but if you see the title history on WWE.com RVD is not recognized as a euro champion. I know he won the unfication match but according to WWE.com he is not recognized as champion. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.184.169.37 (talk) 05:45, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not a Euro Champion 

message: Why is RVD's ECW World Championship not in the ECW section of title reigns? I see that problem with a lot of wrestlers like The Rock and Kurt Angle. They were WCW Champions but it is under WWE could someone fix it.--AD Double J 17:52, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Also, when The Rock won the WCW title, WCW was apart of WWE. I don't know about Kurt Angle though. I think Angle won the WCW title when he was signed with WWE, but he went to WCW for some reason I forget. --  Mikedk9109  (hit me up)  21:32, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Despite what Hybrid is saying, the Van Dam IS a ECW Triple Crown Champion since the ECW Title still counts torwards is. I have provided proof on the Triple Crown page, while Hybrid has not. I hope somebody adds it in to this page since it's hurting WP by hiding the fact that he IS a a ECW Triple Crown Champion. Lrrr IV 02:59, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  ECW Title 

message: Van Dam Has Said In Interviews That He Will Go To TNA When His Contract Expires With WWE. (Id Rather Be Hated For Who I Am, Than Loved For Who I Am Not 21:58, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: RVD To Go To TNA

message: Hello,
I don't know if that is relevant but shouldn't it be mentioned in the trivia section that RVD refused to attend the WWE Iraq shows?
:(remember to sign your posts) He only did that once, though.  Qubeh 19:15, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, he's refused to go twice. Once in 2004, and this past show for 2006. Bmg916 Speak to Me 19:16, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Two out of four isn't bad.  Still, I don't think it's bad enough to be listed.  Qubeh 01:22, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  RVD and Iraq 

message: In regards to Rob Van Dam's contract status, if he didn't give in his notice by the end of last week, his contract would have automatically rolled over. This doesn't mean he's leaving, but it gives him the option to leave in the summer, and they'd have to renegotiate a new deal to keep him. Van Dam's downside guarantee is about $250,000. He probably actually makes about $500,000 if you include merchandise, pay-per-view payoffs and such. Although, he worked all those low drawing ECW house shows, and thus he got a lot of $500 to $750 payoffs while on top, so that may be a high estimate. The ECW guys are now working the higher grossing SmackDown shows, so his payoffs should be back up to speed again anyways.
Also, RVD has a standing offer to go to All Japan. Although, it doesn't seem to mean nearly as much as when he was a regular there earlier in his career because they run very few dates. But between All Japan, TNA, U.S. and Europeam indies, he should still be able to make a lot with far more time off, not to mention control of his schedule. That's why there is a good possibility that he could be leaving WWE in the summer. He'll probably be able to get about $2,500 or more per date on the indie scene, along with hotel & airfare expenses paid, at least at first. But once six months to a year have passed, it may be harder for him to get as many bookings at that rate.
There is talk within WWE of trying to get its "last word" in. Figuring he's leaving, Johnny Ace may make an offer that he'll probably turn down so that he can get the last word in, not to mention as a receipt for him embarrassing at a recent company meeting (RVD made a smart alec remarks towards Ace). People within WWE say that RVD has been telling people that he plans on leaving, but other people think he'll make his decision based on WWE's money offer.
''
Source: http://www.wrestlingnewsworld.com/1/2/wwenews/An_Update_On_Rob_Van_Dam_s_Contract_Status.php
Also it should be noted since the interest in RVD going to TNA, RVD's name was chanted at last Thursday's iMPACT show.--68.209.227.3 23:53, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Future in question? 

message: Can anyone confirm this? --68.209.227.3 21:01, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: According to the 4/30 Wrestling Observer Newsletter, RVD turned down WWE's "final" contract offer. And according to the 5/7 issue, his last day with the company is set to be the television shows right after the 6/3 One Night Stand PPV. His contract ends sometime in the month of June, I believe. After that, he'd be free to work anywhere he wishes, as, due to his contract expiring, he will have no 90-day non-compete clause. 24.162.248.132 01:43, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

text: I Guess we'll find out on impact! this week RealTNAFan 7:26, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Did not extend WWE contract...? 

message: I found :Image:043006rvd3.jpg and noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. Someone will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If it was obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.
As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the  tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as  or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.
If there are other files on this page, consider checking that they have specified their source and are tagged properly, too. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 03:45, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Unspecified source for [[:Image:043006rvd3.jpg]]

message: :Image:043006rvd3.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.
If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.Betacommand (talk • contribs • Bot) 03:45, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:043006rvd3.jpg

message: I also read something about him being one of the mystery former world champions. Will he leave for TNA? 207.69.137.23 21:23, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: King of the Mountain

message: On this page, it is stated that Rob Van Dam suffered a legit concussion at the hands of Randy Orton during his stretcher match, yet on Orton's page it is stated that the injury was kayfabe. Seeing as neither are sourced, which is it? Kevinazite 09:12, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Its kayfabe, RVDs contract ran out and something was needed to get him out of TV. Diivoo 01:40, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Conflicting Information

message: Doesn't he still have a contract with WWE?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.143.139.27 (talk) 09:28, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Currently Inactive? 

message: He is on Hiatus from wrestling at this present moment, therefore can we please refrain from editing it until he returns to any form of wrestling organization   Guns2006 11:44, 1 September 2007
:When he returns, we can note something like "After a brief hiatus from the wrestling industry Van Dam returned at (event) for (company) on (date)." Until then any information on his "hiatus" has been thus far been entirely un-sourced, and therefore cannot be included due to the potentially contentious nature of the specifics surrounding it. Wikipedia is not a primary source of information, and any information on this subject will need to be verified by a reliable neutral, third party source, with proper citations if it is to be included in this article per Wikipedia policies on verifiability and biographies of living people, thanks, and happy editing! Bmg916Speak 15:23, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Please refrain from removing Hiatus 

message: I remember reading recently that should RVD sign with a company other than WWE, Vince McMahon would intend to assert that the name "Rob Van Dam" is actually property of the WWE (as the name of a character and not the stage name of a wrestler). Is that controversy still smoldering, or has there been some resolution? 147.70.242.40 20:51, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Rob Van Dam" - "stage name" or owned by WWE? 

message: I removed the section that stated RvD was involved in a shooting at his home in California on Nov 8, 2007, since I couldn't find anything to back this up, from Wrestling Rumour sites, to News Articles, or anything. If someone can find something to reference this with, please put it back in. ArickIdle 15:36, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Shooting?

message: Should the fact that RVD has been in talks with TNA for a contract signing be put in like it was for sabu's page even though the 2 are just talking and not really seeing eye to eye,cause van dam is really considering joining but not at the moment not until something good like a lighter schedule or something comes in anyway cause he's concentrating on family right now,but i think the fact that there in talks should still be posted anyone agrees/disagrees and btw the only reliable sources are wrestling news and spoiler sites.
:According to who? Mshake3 (talk) 05:04, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Such as....... Mshake3 (talk) 05:10, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Small chance of TNA run 

message: He's scheduled to face Booker T in Booker's PWA promotion at their Christmas Chaos II event later this month.  TonyFreakinAlmeida (talk) 17:15, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Match with Booker T 

message: I may be able to get to this tomorrow, but I just thought I'd leave this note, since in all likelihood, I'm going to forget by then. Gavyn Sykes (talk) 01:26, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Signature moves section needs trimming 

message: In this  document it says that RVD's name is Robert Alex Szatowski, not Robert Alexander Szatkowski, but I don't know if it's a reliable source. Just wanted to tell you and ask if you could find out what's his real name...  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nooreth (talk • contribs) 14:26, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Real name 

message: right rvd is the longest reging hardcard champion since the 24/7 rule i went to a lot of trouble to get that info for a progect i'm working on so editing it out plus it is a accoplishment for rvd and needs to be noted KCDavis (talk) 16:29, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: What makes that notable? –Cheers, LAX 20:42, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

text: Well, we [WP:PW] don't mention that anyway. –Cheers, LAX 10:47, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

text: Then you and your mates at college should join the WP:PW, go to the project discussion page and try to get a consensus in your favor. It's got nothing to do with ego, it's everything to do with consensus. If you want to try and get consensus in your favor, then you and your mates at college join the WP:PW and voice your thoughts on it. Otherwise, trivial matters such as who has the second longest or third longest or fourth longest or whatever reign with a title will be viewed as trivia rather than a major wrestling accomplishment.Odin's Beard (talk) 14:19, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  hardcore title