Talk:Glossary of professional wrestling terms

message: Can anyone PLEASE use the real definition of the word. A Mark is ANY wrestling fan. I've worked in the wrestling industry and wrestlers refer to THEMSELVES as marks. It's NOT a fan that thinks it's staged.   — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.84.45.140 (talk) 12:42, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Unfortunately, we can't just take Wikipedians' word for it, but fortunately, we can take Cody Rhodes' word. 6 years later, I was able to update the definition based on an article about a tweet of his, so unless someone undoes it, this is fixed. "Yes...It's Raining" 18:14, 25 July 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Mark

message: The example for this term is the "Vince McMahon is dead" story, but since it's been... resurrected (sorry, bad pun)... it should be changed. Anyone know what it had as an example before? And for the record I definitly think that term needs an example, instead of simply removing it. Mujarimojo 03:14, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm trying to fix issues addressed on this page, so, just for the future, neither abort nor scrapped (which isn't even an included term in the glossary) reference the McMahon death storyline. "Yes...It's Raining" 18:14, 25 July 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Abortion/Scrapped

message: The definition for Rib is becoming rather lengthy and unweildy, and is beginning to contain information that, for other terms, is in a separate article.  Personally, I feel it'd be best to trim the definition down to, "a joke played on a wrestler by another wrestler," and move the clarifying information and examples to a separate article.  Anybody agree? --HBK 00:17, Feb 4, 2005 (UTC)
Not a bad idea. I say go ahead and write the article. --Chrysaor 01:27, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, it's been 15 years, but I say that if terms like heel and face warrant their own article, there is more than enough information on and documented stories of ribs to warrant and be able to fill an article.  So I wrote it.  There went my afternoon.  I hope it's accepted and I hope it is well-written enough to satisfy everyone (but hey, isn't that the joy of Wikipedia?  You don't like it, fix it).  I tried my best to keep some cohesive themes instead of just making it a list of ribs (or a biography of Owen Hart, but he did necessitate his own section).  So, I'm going to submit it tonight, and by the time anyone reads this, Rib (professional wrestling) will be a link to an article. Damn. There may be a problem, though.  I just looked at what's there now, and it's a redirect to Glossary of professional wrestling terms.  Apparently there was a page in 2007 that was merged (don't see how since ribbing only gets like 7 words in that glossary article.  I'm going to post a new section to this talk page and ask what I should do.  I spent a lot of time on that article and I believe it's up to snuff quality-wise. If anyone reading this knows whose approval I would need to replace the redirect, please let me know - I'm not super Wiki-savvy. "Yes...It's Raining" 23:15, 25 July 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Separate article for '''Rib'''? 

message: I think it might be a good idea to differentiate between jargon used in the business and slang used by fans. They cross over, but they're not the same thing.  — Gwalla | Talk 23:55, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The list has been trimmed substantially since this was posted three years ago. Nikki311 17:52, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jargon vs. Slang 

message: I had put up "Match of the Year," and it was deleted as the contributor believed the definition to be obvious and used in places other than PWI. While I agree that the term is used in other publications, I thought "Match of the Year" to be reasonably encyclopeidic and thus should be included somewhere in Wikipedia -- if not on this page, then as a separate link.
I guess a good question would be – is there already a "Match of the Year entry on Wikipedia? User:Briguy52748 10:08 14 May 2005 (UTC)
----
Can anyone explain why my definition of cetard is being erased again. Its been here for a month or so, after I revised the definition, but since Cena won his title back somebody keeps deleting it again. I think the explanation I provided is completely neutral.--Gusiman 01:36, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I can't speak for the person who's erasing it, but personally, the only place I've ever seen the term used is on this list.  --HBK|Talk 01:52, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=CetardUnopeneddoor 03:08, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Match of the Year 

message: Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. Commentary, be it from Scott Keith, someone who read his books, or anyone else is not encyclopedic. - Chadbryant 04:42, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The remarks are relevant due to Keith's involvement with the professional wrestling business; also, they serve as a perfectly good example of usage for other wrestling terms while building on the entry itself. You are trolling. Please stop. --Eat At Joes 04:50, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Scott Keith has no involvement with the wrestling business. He's authored a few books on the subject. His commentary is by no means encyclopedic. Please read Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, lurk, and learn. - Chadbryant 04:59, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: What the hell? Because he has written books on the subject he has no involvement with the business? That's like saying George Orwell has no involvement with government, he's just written a few books on the subject. Or Bill Clinton doesn't know anything about being President, he's just written a few books on the subject. Keith's commentary is valid because -- as you have just stated -- he is a published author on the subject and thus a viable source of information. I submit it is YOU who must "lurk, and learn." --Eat At Joes 05:07, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

text: I was defending the article from intentional vandalism, and in the face of misbehaviour by someone who has registered over 135 accounts (most of which have been blocked for abuse), I was doing so as nicely as humanly possible. Note that you essentially made the same judgement call that I did, in that the content this user was insisting on re-inserting was not encyclopedic. I realize that 'assume good faith' is a Wikicommandment, but the 'duck test' hasn't failed us yet, either. - Chadbryant 06:58, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You were largely correct as far as content was concerned, but when you violate any of the things I cited, your actions warrant blocking.  Period.  --Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 07:04, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: As I understand it, 3RR does not apply to reverting vandalism (which is what someone insisting on re-adding unencyclopedic content is guilty of). Please correct me if I am wrong . - Chadbryant 07:11, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

text: So someone re-adding unencyclopedic content simply to be disruptive is not vandalism? - Chadbryant 20:21, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Apparantly not, Chad. Guess you'll have to find another reason to manipulate Wikipedia administrators while running with your own bias in articles. --Eat At Joes 03:51, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Commentary Is Not Encyclopedic

message: From: http://www.stormwrestling.com/030406.html
"Q: In one of your last commentaries you said that WWE should start doing angles instead of storylines, what does that mean?Also, does TNA, ECW, or WCW do angles or storylines?
A: I explained this in my last Q and A you should look back for it. In a nut shell: Angles are the drama created between 2 or more people which leads to a match. The Rey – Orton stuff using Eddie, would be an angle in my opinion. It created tension between them, which made you want to see them fight. The Shelton Benjamin stuff with his Momma is what I would call a storyline. There is a lot of drama and stuff going on but it doesn’t build to anything. There is no match for us to see. It really only involves the one performer."
There you have it, an actual seasoned Professional Wrestler showing us the difference between the two.
SilentRage 14:48, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Lance Storm is wrong and just arguing semantics. -- Bdve 14:53, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Angles and Storylines are not the same thing! 

message: As you are probably aware, there are many slang glossaries on Wikipedia with widespread acceptance, yet virutally all of them violate the following policy:
Wikipedia is not a dictionary
 Wikipedia is not a dictionary or a usage or jargon guide. Wikipedia articles are not:
# Dictionary definitions. Because Wikipedia is not a dictionary, please do not create an entry merely to define a term. An article should usually begin with a  good definition; if you come across an article that is nothing more than a definition, see if there is information you can add that would be appropriate for an encyclopedia. An exception to this rule is for articles about the cultural meanings of individual  numbers.
# Lists of such definitions. There are, however,  disambiguation pages consisting of pointers to other pages; these are used to clarify differing meanings of a word. Wikipedia also includes  glossary pages for various specialized fields.
# A usage guide or slang and idiom guide. Wikipedia is not in the business of saying how words, idioms, etc. should be used. We aren't teaching people how to talk like a Cockney chimney-sweep. However, it may be important in the context of an encyclopedia article to describe just how a word is used to distinguish among similar, easily confused ideas, as in nation or freedom. In some special cases an article about an essential piece of slang may be appropriate.
----
This has created a situation where editors trying to enforce policy frequently nominate such glossaries for deletion, with most of the glossaries surviving the process with a consensus of Keep or No concensus.  This ongoing battle has been raging on with respect to slang glossaries for at least the past two years.  Yet the glossaries have survived, and more continue to be created.  Based on the results of the majority of the Article for Deletion (AfD) discussions, the general concensus seems to be that slang glossaries should have a place on Wikipedia.  The relevant policy is no longer consistent with general consensus, and this schism has resulted in a large number of pointless AfD discussions which serve only to waste the time and effort of those involved.  When the majority of Wikipedians defy a policy, it is time to reevaluate the policy.
Therefore, I have started a discussion on Wikipedia talk:What Wikipedia is not#Slang glossaries to discuss the fate of slang glossaries (such as this one) and to discuss whether or not the policy should be ammended to reflect the defacto acceptance of slang glossaries on Wikipedia.  They are here, and based on the results of AfD discussions, they seem to be here to stay.  So shouldn't the policy be updated?  If the policy was changed to allow slang glossaries or changed to provide for their speedy deletion, either of these solutions would save a lot of time and effort wasted on fruitless AfDs.  You are welcome to join the discussion.  --List Expert 10:28, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I know that they seem to violate Wikipedia policies, but lists such as this IMO are far more 'encyclopaedic' than descriptions of every Pokemon character/card ever created, or every episode of a TV series.  This is a really good list in an area where Wikipedia is pretty good overall, pro wrestling (and could be great if some of the fans quit 'updating' every single kafaybe event in a promotion or a career).  Having said that, I'm about to change bum from saying anything about an "unknown superstar", an oxymoron if there ever was one.  Rlquall 13:30, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Announcement concerning slang glossary policy discussion 

message: Cena Finish or Cena'd Match/Cena Match. I think it should mean that Cena [or another wrestler we can refer to as "The Cena"] starts off the match blowing up, by doing 1 move after the other, and pinning the opponent after each move, then the opponent pummels him badly for most of the match, then The Cena gains an ultra second wind (a la Popeye[without the spinach] and Hulk Hogan[without the hulking up]), and does a few moves[The Moves of Doom], then wins the match. Well its up to a consensus to decide I guess. --TJ Sparks 08:42, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Never heard of it.«»bd(talk stalk) 15:36, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

text: Well...then...it shouldn't go.«»bd(talk stalk) 18:03, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

text: I think they were removed from those articles because that term is more of a fan creation than an actual term used in the business. I could be wrong about that, though. Anyway, my thinking is...if you have a reliable source for a term...add away. Nikki311 16:08, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  I have a suggestion on a new term should be on the list. 

message: How comes "Superman Booking" isn't on the list? It is commonly used nowadays amongst smarks, especially with the ways John Cena and Bobby Lashley have been booked as being unstoppable. I'd add it myself but I wanted to make sure with you lot first.
Silver Fang 10:13, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Superman Booking 

message: I've recently come across quite a few pages that should be cut down and redirected to this page. A list of the proposed redirects and a discussion can be found here. Feel free to add any thoughts. Nikki311 19:31, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merges 

message: I'm needing to bring this up:
"Flying Burrito is a wrestling move that was given to Shawn Michaels on RAW in 2004 with a different name, the move is a flying forearm to the opponent, followed by a crash to the mat on their backs, and followed by a kip-up before, or almost the same time the wrestler(s) gets up, the kip-up is known as Shawn Michaels trademark finishers in WWE, and also crowd tease as well."
This term dates back to Tito Santana as a slighty backhanded term by Jesse Ventura for Tito's (or as he would say Chico's) flying forearm.  I can't remember right off which one, but the term is heard in an early Wrestlemania.  I'm a Shawn Michaels fan, but let's give credit where credit is due.  And I've never known a kip-up to be a finisher; a cool signature move, but not a finisher.  Smobro68 02:22, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Flying Burrito 

message: every issue, wwe magazine gives definitions of wrestling slang. the slang words are not real by any means, but im wondering if they would be worth adding. Xchickenx 02:27, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Slang From WWE Magazine 

message: an Upset?
:Anything can be added if it is actual pro wrestling slang and is sourced. Nikki311 21:04, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: What about

message: i have spotted 2 possible elaborations. the first one is to do with Kayfabe, and the alternate origin (workers ringing collect and saying it was from Kay Fabian to let their family know they arrived safe without costing a call) found on the kayfabe entry. the other is the term carny. though I dont have a source, this is probably a shortening of Carnival, since originally a lot of pro wrestling was done in carnivals back when it first started out. Lynx Raven Raide 14:00, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Possible elaborations

message: Whatever happend to the term here? It used to be listed, and should as it is still used today.Furioku 21:52, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It probably got removed because it was unsourced. Unless a source can be provided, a term is considered original research and deleted per Wikipedia policy. Nikki311 21:55, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Will  and  do? Emurphy42 (talk) 02:49, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No. Anyone can edit either of those websites, so they aren't considered reliable. A published book source would be your best bet. Nikki311 02:54, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: X-pac Heat

message: There is a dead link to "comeback spot" in the definition of "Hope spot" and another dead link to "X-Pac heat" in the definition of "heat". 
84.240.55.7 12:45, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Removed. Nikki311 16:33, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dead links 

message: Under 'S' and in the word 'Spot' it has a link to 'Take Home Spot' (which links to 'T' in this page) but it is not there, any reason why? 84.45.134.188 (talk) 16:59, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Good point well made. Some numpty probably forgot to add it. Added it now. Lemon Demon (talk) 22:32, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Link to nonexistant slang  

message: Can these be added to the list? Goozle (sp?) is to ring someone by the neck a la the chokeslam. Pluder is weapons like the table, chair, or ladder.
:Depends. What is your source? Nikki311 19:56, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Goozle & Plunder 

message: Gimmick is a common term for either growth hormone or steroids. I heard it in use quite a bit actually by professional wrestlers in "On the Road with Iron Sheik 2007" They used the term casually too.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Klichka (talk • contribs) 18:59, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gimmick 

message: What exactly are the rules on sourcing? Suggestion seems to be EVERYTHING must be referenced, but of course not all of them are, eg. Angle, Cheap Shot etc. --Kiltman67 (talk) 17:45, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: WP:CITE, WP:RS, and WP:V. Nikki311 17:55, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sourcing 

message: Was this term wrong or unsourced or simply nonexistent?  It seems much more common to use "Hoss" in its place, so I've added Hoss, but Lunch Wagon always had that sort of "fat-shit loser" feel to it.  Was it ever a real slang word? AndarielHalo (talk) 13:37, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lunch Wagon 

message: The "Tweener" section is completely wrong. 
Stone Cold Steve Austin was a face. He only fought heels and teamed with faces. He hit faces with the Stunner, but that was Stone Cold's rattlesnake gimmick, being in it alone. When it came to feuds, Austin fought only heels, and The Undertaker as a face, which lead to them teaming up to go against two heels. Austin was a face, not a tweener.
Eddie Guerrero was also not a tweener. He was a face who used heel tactics and got cheered for them. That's a gimmick, not a heel/face allegiance. And I've never heard of ANYONE who used that definition for a tweener.
A more accurate example of tweener is Samoa Joe in TNA 2005-2006. He evenly fought both faces and heels and showed no real alliance to either the face or heel side.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.127.246.5 (talk) 07:11, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: "Tweener" definition

message: The result was to move. -- iMatthew T.C. 11:16, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move request 

message: I think for some of the main ones, we can use examples just like we have done for enforcer etc. it can make it easier for some people to understand the terms better! --Ruthless-paki (talk) 22:00, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Some terms could have examples, but usually it just invites edit warring. I could want Victoria listed as an enforcer, you could want someone else, and someone else could want a third person. For words like an enforcer, the definition is clear, and we can't just keeping changing or adding millions of examples from the history of professional wrestling. If there is an obvious example (like the Montreal Screwjob under Screwjob), then that is fine. Another thing to keep in mind is that examples need to be sourced using a reliable source, or it is original research. The source needs to specifically state the example and use said term. Nikki♥311 22:36, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Examples 

message: Almost every parenthetical comparison in this article should contain the word "contrast," rather than "compare." Comparing things is telling how they are the same. Contrasting them is telling how they are different.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wangatrocious (talk • contribs) 16:22, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Compare vs Contrast

message: I couldnt find a source on the web currently for the correct usage of them term Rat, but look at any shoot interview ever, I know off the top of my head ones by Raven and 1 Cornette/Heenan use the the term i had up, also im thinking my edit is less controversial than saying all female fans are rats, if you take your mother or sister to a show she's a rat? Rats are generally women who hang out at shows to hook up with a wrestler.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.82.56.240 (talk) 20:54, 7 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Defining a Rat 

message: Trachoma isn't wrestling slang; it's not even slang.  It's a real medical term. And it's relationship with modern wrestling is slight.  Are we going to list every disease or illness wrestlers are prone to (70 years ago no less)?  If there was a slang word that wrestlers called trachoma, add that.  Dan20001 (talk) 12:34, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Trachoma

message: The Attitude Era began at WrestleMania XIV, not 13, so I have updated accordingly.John546 (talk) 01:21, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Attitude Era

message: I check pages listed in :Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of :Burial (professional wrestling)'s orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.
Reference named "OWOW":
From Ric Flair: 
From Orlando Jordan: 
From Stone Cold Steve Austin: 
From Nick Mitchell: 
From Randy Savage: 
From Chris Benoit: 
From Triple H: 
From Ricky Steamboat: 
From Mark Henry: 
From Kevin Nash: 
From Scott Hall: 
From Johnny Jeter: 
From Stephanie McMahon: 
From Brock Lesnar: 
From Michael Brendli: 
From Super Crazy: 
From Nick Nemeth: 
I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 22:00, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Orphaned references in [[:Burial (professional wrestling)]] 

message: The article states that the term is unrecognized by workers and in the past, this was the case.  However, today, many workers use the term, including veterans.  For verifying purposes, Lance Storm frequently uses the term when appearing weekly on Bryan Alverez's Figure Four Daily radio show.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.146.134.250 (talk) 02:46, 13 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Workrate 

message: Weird that term isnt anywhere in the list. DonJerome316 (talk) 16:02, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chain Wrestling? 

message: I thought I would post this here first, in case it needs any work.
;: Before it was possible to stream or otherwise transmit video over the Internet, and particularly in the days of territorial promotions, wrestling fans would tape record wrestling programs off of television, dub copies of the tapes, and seek out other fans with copies of programs from other promotions.  More obsessive fans would maintain libraries of tapes going back many years, in some cases selling copies in addition to trading.  Others would seek out tapes from Japan, which utilizes the same NTSC signal format as North America.  The availability of tapes, and the condition of the video image therein, from a particular era was largely dependent on the availability of affordable enough technology.  When fans first began recording wrestling programs in earnest, ca. 1979-1980, a VCR could cost $1,000 to $1,500 (US), and blank video tapes could cost $20 to $25 (US) apiece.  The Wrestling Observer Newsletter traces its beginnings to a tape trading list. —Preceding unsigned comment added by RadioKAOS (talk • contribs) 
It needs some reliable sources before it can be added. Nikki♥311  01:24, 4 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tape trading 

message: Where is potato, or accidentally hitting another wrestler? I hear them use this term all the time, and I think it was once on this page but I'm not sure. It definitely needs to be added. dj_ansi (talk) 15:47, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Potato 

message: I feel that the smark definition is contradictory to itself. It is stated that a smark is a person 'enjoying' pro wrestling while knowing that it is staged. A little later, a smark is depicted to be "looked down on" by wrestlers and "other fans". So 'marks', in the traditional sense (if they still actually exist), look down on smarks (which I believe can be called what is your average wrestling fan these days) because they "play along", enjoying PW, but knowing it's fake? Weird. Strike Da Mic, 05 May 2011, 16:51 GST+01
:Huh? A mark is someone who thinks wrestling is real and usually goes along with what the booker wants such as cheering faces and booing heels. A smark is someone who knows for the most part how wrestling works and knows it's fake but watches the show as it's entertaining. I most cases it seems smarks will cheer heel characters more often than faces and are more worried about things such as workrate that the average fan doesn't care much about. TheGary (talk) 02:24, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Smark 

message: It should be pointed out that Flair stole the Flair Flip from Ray Stevens, and the Flair Flop from Harley Race, and he has acknowledged both as such.RadioKAOS (talk) 12:16, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Flair Flip/Flop 

message: Following this page, it appears as if person or persons are attempting to edit it so as to maintain the primacy of that Torch web page as a source, even though its inadequacy as a source has been pointed out repeatedly.  I started a revision of this page offline some weeks back.  Here's the problem as I see it.  While moving recently, I noticed that all of my wrestling books must be in storage, because I could only find two lying around, namely The Cowboy and the Cross by Bill Watts and Scott Williams, and Ring of Hell by Matthew Randazzo V.  Using just these two books alone for additions and references, based upon my working copy, I increased the size of the page by about 20 percent.  Now, I would think that just about any wrestling book out there is going to contain abundant usage of and/or references to jargon.  I take it the problem must be the usual bias against non-web-based sources, which is more obvious the more its denied by people.  If you don't want to debate that point, then at least recognize that there is bias, mostly rampant recentism and gratuitous references to the WWE.  For example, the lack of obvious terms such as "hardway," "ring general" or "territory" makes this list suspect.  "Supershow" and "Wrestler's Court" are NOT WWE-specific as the article would attest.RadioKAOS (talk) 05:35, 6 May 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: This PWTorch thing is ref spam. Blatant example of abusing WP for advertising a commercial website. I'd recommend its use be removed from this page, but would likely be body slam reverted. Cookiehead (talk) 23:46, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sources 

message: Why is it not noted anywhere that the term "selling" or any of it's variations are used constantly in other sports. When someone "flops" during a foul for example they will often say that he's "selling" the foul. I would be interested to know where the actual origins of the slang term comes from and if it originated it wrestling. TheGary (talk) 02:21, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Selling Origins and Usage 

message: Smark and smart mark are different.  Smarks think they know they don't like a difference of opinion, they hate on certain things in wrestling, they have what I call "a flavour of the week" when it comes to liking wrestlers as they will like a wrestler one week, than they will like a wrestler another week, they believe everything they read on wrestling websites, they think they know stuff about wrestling when they are constantly proven wrong, they consider the term "mark" as something negative.
Smart marks know stuff about wrestling, they are always learning and wanting to improve their knowledge, they can handle a difference of opinion, they don't consider the term "mark" as something negative.
There should be this distinction.  Mr. C.C.Hey yo!I didn't do it! 04:07, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Sounds like a matter of opinion.  There appears to be a certain amount of Kool-Aid drinking regardless of what label is applied.  BTW, I think it's safe to say that the terms predate wrestling websites, so they're just incidental to rather than part of the culture.RadioKAOS (talk) 22:46, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Smark and Smart Mark are not the Same 

message: I've previously mentioned the direct influence that professional wrestling has had on hip hop, most of which has either been ignored or deleted from articles.  I'm not so sure that the following belongs in this article, but perhaps should warrant mention somewhere.  As it relates to wrestling slang, here are a couple of relevant examples from songs:
* From "Johnny Ryall" by the Beastie Boys - "He's even more over than my mayor Ed Koch".
* From "Bad Touch Example" by Company Flow - "Just a promo...understand...to be the man...you gots to beat the man".
I'm pretty certain that there must be other examples out there.RadioKAOS (talk) 18:02, 6 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hip hop connections to slang 

message: The definition of the term "what" is written with a lot of personal opinion, and I question whether it should even be considered a wrestling term as it's just a fan chant and not typically used by members of the business. Someone please revise or remove. Or give me the ok to do it myself.
134.53.112.83 (talk) 17:56, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Definition of "What" 

message: In my browser, at least, the whole list appears in boldface and I can't tell what causes it. —Tamfang (talk) 09:29, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  quiet please 

message: All the links here are directed towards a website that says the Jews were behind 9/11.  Someone needs to fix ASAP  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.238.113.174 (talk) 15:10, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Em, no they're not. I just checked all the web references and they're going to where they're supposed to be. Can you point out a link in this article that goes to such a website? NiciVampireHeart 15:33, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fake links 

message: "The appropriate term for female lumberjacks."  HA HA HA!!!  This reminds me of a recent comment I read: "Wikipedia does not subscribe to political correctness."  Rather than "appropriate term", I'm pretty certain that this was a clever play on "lumberjack" invented by Michael Cole.  I could be wrong;  feel free to correct me.RadioKAOS (talk) 08:28, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: "Appropriate term" is inappropriately wordy here, but it is basically true. It may have started as a quip, but now whenever a Lumberjack match features puppies (the appropriate term for female tits), it's "officially" called a Lumberjill Match. I'll reword it. InedibleHulk (talk) 00:52, 27 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lumberjill 

message: Ok, in the term "superhuman comeback", it says the undertaker uses the sit up move. Then the term sit-up links to the kip-up page. A kip up is when you jump up onto your feet, like Shawn Michaels does. Undertaker does not do this. Why does sit up link to kip up? The only thing similar is that they start on the back. Im removing this link, it has no relevance to sit up.
:It's bad enough that the article has become even more of an example farm since it was tagged as such.  Why are we so stuck on using Shawn Michaels as an example for a kip up?  Dynamite Kid was appearing in main events and regularly doing kip ups when Michaels was still taking bumps in his bedroom.RadioKAOS (talk) 18:24, 26 September 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll be cleaning out the examples once I'm done cleaning the unnecessary or inappropriate terms. I don't think the editors responsible understood what a glossary is. InedibleHulk (talk) 21:03, 5 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sit up 

message: This article has plenty which isn't suitable for a glossary. Stuff like The Curtain Call, The Montreal screwjob and The Attitude Era aren't terms as much as they are events, like SummerSlam or Showdown at Shea. Any time they need to be explained in an article, a Wikilink to their article would be the correct thing to do. This article is for unfamiliar terms which are commonly used in various professional wrestling contexts, such as "blade", "angle" and "run-in", not for listing specific, one-time occurences relating to specific wrestlers. Daniel Bryan's "Yes" and "No", Punk's "Pipe bomb" and the Flair flip and flop certainly do not belong.
Stuff like "play-by-play", "colour commentator", "roids", "trachoma", "school" or anything else that means the same thing anywhere else as it does in wrestling isn't needed. Terms that are basically used by just one person ("clubberin'" or "vanilla midget" or "total package") don't add any value here. 
Remember, this glossary is mainly to be used for explaining things to outsiders. Any term with a standalone article really has no purpose here, since a Wikilink to that article will do a better job of explaining than a Wikilink to this page. The examples given (in tweener, no-sell or botch, for instance) don't add anything to a non-fans understanding of a term, since they've probably never seen the example) and should be eliminated as cruft. 
If anyone objects, speak up. InedibleHulk (talk) 21:19, 27 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  I'll be deleting a bunch soon. Don't panic.  

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Glossary of professional wrestling terms. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.wwe.com/shows/eliminationchamber/2013/the-rock-cm-punk
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110606073745/http://www.pwtorch.com/insiderglossary.shtml to http://www.pwtorch.com/insiderglossary.shtml
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110606073745/http://www.pwtorch.com/insiderglossary.shtml to http://www.pwtorch.com/insiderglossary.shtml
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:39, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Under the " School " category , Why is New Japan Dojo highlighted in blue , but clicking on it only sends you to the New Japan page , which has NO information on it at all ?
Absolutely should  NOT  be highlighted in blue and be clickable if there is  ZERO info on it on New Japan's page . ≈≈≈≈
:It's a redirect. You can A) unlink it, B) add info about the dojo in the article. Pretty simple. Hardly something that needs a talkpage discussion on an unrelated article.★Trekker (talk) 23:45, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Japan Dojo 

message: The chokeslam nickname
2601:189:C381:5A60:C529:E00E:D306:8E2E (talk) 07:44, 20 November 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  We need a definition for " Goozle " 

message: Frankly, I’m far too lazy to go and fix this myself, but why are all of the terms in the article not capitalised and bolded? Makes the page needlessly difficult to read. 124.188.129.39 (talk) 10:51, 15 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Grammar 

message: I'm not entirely convinced that this even needs to be on here, as it is used in many other situations than just pro-wrestling. But the bit about Stone Cold and "greener than goose shit" really doesn't belong. That's just an old, old, OLD folksy saying using the word in the same sense. --User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 01:40, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Green