Talk:List of WWE personnel

Torrie Wilson

How come she has been removed from the page depsite being out on an injury and still being active on the roster segment and diva page on the WWE website? She's not on the alumni page either, so I guess she hasn't parted ways with WWE. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.153.43.77 (talk) 14:10, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

She's listed in Other Personal. iMatthew 2008 14:14, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

he needs to be in inactive talent not other personal. <font-family:"Tahoma">Vote 4 Pedro 17:40, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

No, she is in other personnel, because she has been advised not to wrestle anymore, so she is doing promotional work alongside Ric Flair, but she will not return as an active diva to any brand.--~SRS~ 17:43, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

That has been verified on Wrestling News sites. Gamloverks (talk) 16:17, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, but she is released now.~SRS~ 21:48, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Rey (Important)

i found this website you may say its an unrelible source but all its stories are true they say rey will return in june heres the website http://wrestlingtruth.com/index.php?subaction=showfull&id=1209488538&archive=&start_from=&ucat=3& 172.141.66.93 (talk) 21:41, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

When he comes back for real, we'll add a source.SimonKSK 15:08, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

J.R

Jim Ross is not a play by play comentator, he is a proper comentator, he was removed for one match because some other loser was having a sook but thats one match in how long? or is there a reason behind you sying this?-- The Great One  10:59, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Kane & C.M. Punk

They are on the roster as a tag team do they tag up enough to be considered one? <font-family:"Tahoma">Vote 4 Pedro 18:18, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

I'd say yes for now, they have tagged a fair amount of matches, and are competing for the titles at JD. King iMatthew 2008 18:19, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

O, I didn't know that yeah they should definately be on there my bad lol. <font-family:"Tahoma">Vote 4 Pedro 18:22, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Me neither. If they win the tag titles at JD, then yes of course they will. But Kane and Punk are also on side feuds (one-on-one) so not to much of a team at the moment. --~SRX~ 18:32, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Yeah that's a though one, I think every one know were that storyline is going <font-family:"Tahoma">#1 Metallica Fan Your Hancock 00:08, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

CM Punk

CM Punk should be noted as being able to appear on all 3 brands due to having Money in the Bank.

That case gives him the right to be on any show, any time so he can cash it in whenever he wants.

Things like that should be explained so it's understood why he can be on a brand that isn't his home brand, just like the SD/ECW talent share.

Vjmlhds May 11, 2008 20:03 (UTC)

Well he doesn't appear on Raw that much, and he only appears on SD/ECW, so not really notable that he is able to do so, now if he appeared every week on Raw, that is a different story.--~SRX~ 20:07, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

He has appeared twice on Raw since 'Mania, IRRC. one was the raw directly after, which is quite typical. The other was KoTR which was a special case. I don't think it needs to be mentioned. Gavyn Sykes (talk) 20:09, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Take last year for example, Kennedy (then a Smackdown guy) won the MITB case, and he appeared quite frequently on Raw after that.

And Edge (then a Raw guy) went to Smackdown and beat the Undertaker for the World Title.

My point is that having the case gives you the right to be on all 3 brands because you can cash in any time, anywhere.

Whether or not you always show up is one thing, but having the case gives you the right to, that's the point.

Vjmlhds May 11, 2008 20:16 (UTC)

There is no written rule that it gives your those rights. Read the last sentence of the first paragraph, which proves the statement about C.M. Punk to be un-needed. King iMatthew 2008 22:37, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Money in the Bank means you can go after any title, any time, any place. As Edge showed last year when (as a Raw wrestler) he appeared on Smackdown to beat the Undertaker for the World Title.

As Wiki's own article for MITB states, "the briefcase holder...can appear on any of the 3 shows to allow the case holder the chance to cash in".

WWE has plainly stated that the case holder can pick his own spot at his own time frame to cash in.

Having that case gives CM Punk the specific right to be on Raw whenever he chooses, so he is given the chance to cash in (if he wants to do so). That sets him apart from anybody else who pops up on Raw when it isn't his home brand.

Vjmlhds May 14, 2008 18:42 (UTC)

Ok but anytime refers to a "one night only" thing, as he will cash it in one night, and then he will become part of that brand, its not like he will be regularly competing on all three brands, its only a one night only thing (with the exception of SD!/ECW)~SRX~ 20:45, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

I never said anything about regularly appearing on Raw, just that he could appear due to holding the MITB case.

We make note of the SD/ECW talent share because it has been made clear that those 2 brands are working together and guys could be on both shows.

All I'm saying is that CM Punk has the right to appear on Raw as well because it's part of the MITB gimmick that he could go to any show, anytime he wants, and cash in.

Vjmlhds May 14, 2008 21:10 (UTC)

For one night!, if he has the right to appear on all three brands, why don't I see him "appearing" regularly on Raw? Because, the MiTB is for a one night only appearance, followed by regular appearances after the cash-in.~SRX~ 21:16, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

He doesn't have to be there all the time, having MITB just means he can if he wants to.

Also, just because the ECW and Smackdown guys can go back and forth, it doesn't mean that every guy does it all the time, it just means they can if they want to.

Vjmlhds May 14, 2008 21:21 (UTC)

No, the SD!/ECW deal just allows it. It is also to build up feuds, however, the MiTB appears regularly on one show, (exception with SD/ECW), if I remember correctly, when Edge won it in 2005, he never went to SD!. When RVD won it in 2006, he never went to SD!, he remained on Raw, because he made it clear that he wanted to challenge for the WWE Championship, (which is the exception, as it is clear that he wanted to challenge for a Raw-exclusive title). In 2007, Mr.Kennedy appeared on SD! but not on Raw, when he was drafted, he only appeared on Raw, when Edge won it back, he cashed it in on "one night" on SmackDown!. Same thing applies to Punk.~SRX~ 21:26, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

You're wrong SRX, Kennedy appeared on Raw quite a bit when he had the MITB case, getting in Cena's face about being able to cash in anytime, anywhere, and boasting about cashing in at Wrestlemania. In fact it was on Raw where Edge beat Kennedy to win the case, and Edge then cashed it in the next night on Smackdown.

Kennedy got drafted to Raw after he came back from his injury, (which was the reason they took the MITB case from him to start with).

In '05 MITB was Raw exclusive, In '06 it became inter-promotional (RVD had the right to go to SD if he wanted to, he just never did), and in '07 ECW got added to the mix.

Vjmlhds May 14, 2008 21:54 (UTC)

Those were exceptions, however, this year there was no source that stated Punk could appear on all three brands, unless I missed it, but if there is one (reliable that is), it can be added, but if there isn't then the note shall not be added.~SRX~ 22:29, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

SRX is indeed incorrect about the MITB siutation and the suggested change should have been made. MaskedSuperAgent (talk) 11:43, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Wrestling GMs

Before we get into an edit war, I have a compromise.

We have a separate category, for guys who wrestle along with another function.

For example:

Occasional Wrestlers

• Jerry Lawler - Color Commentator
• Roddy Piper - Makes Special Appearances
• William Regal - General Manager
• Ron Simmons - Makes Occasional Appearances

And we put non-wrestling talent in the "Other On-Air Talent" category.

What do you think?

Vjmlhds May 15, 2008 19:50 (UTC)

What's wrong with the current format?~SRX~ 19:57, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

There's been some back and forth about whether guys like Regal and Estrada should be put as active wrestlers or other on air talent.

I'm just putting forth a compromise to stop an edit war.

Vjmlhds May 15, 2008 20:02 (UTC)

Ok, so that doesn't call for a new format. Adding more contents into the TOC makes the page longer than what it already is. I don't see what's wrong with just putting Occasional wrestler, next to the name under Other On air talent. Now however, if they both wrestler week by week, then general manager needs to be added next 2 the name under active wrestlers. --~SRX~ 20:06, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Like I said, going through the history page, there was a lot of back and forth, so I tried to find middle ground. Not trying to re-invent the wheel.

Vjmlhds May 15, 2008 20:11 (UTC)

Its appreciated that you wanted to find some middle ground, but IMO its unnecessary to add it, as this is a pretty long list as it is, and if it exceeds, the page will take forever to buffer.~SRX~ 20:13, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Pay no attention to SRX. I agree that your suggestion makes the page that much more simpler and eliminates any possible confusion so feel free to keep up the good work. SRX isn't God so don't feel as if he's the end all, be all on anything. MaskedSuperAgent (talk) 11:46, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but assuming bad faith and making near-personal attacks dont make your arguments stronger. I feel the same way SRX does. — Κaiba 22:18, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

No need for angry outbursts Kaiba. We're all civil people here. Your attitude isn't necessary mate. Mr.Krycek (talk) 22:26, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

I think every body except Masked Super Hero (I hope i got your name right by the way *Sarcasm*) agree's with SRX! <font-family:"Tahoma">#1 Metallica Fan Your Hancock 23:36, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Who's angry? Saying what policy reflects is not an attitude, an angry outburst or incivil as your implying, I suggest you not push the agenda of the indefblocked editor.. — Κaiba 04:34, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Agenda? A little paranoid aren't we? Heaven forbid someone disagrees with another user but agrees with another's helpful suggestion. Vjmlhds was right on the money but I suppose we can't let good ideas get in the way of kids running around with imaginary power on this website. (Mr.Krycek (talk) 16:38, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

We ALLWAY'S listen to ANYBODY that has idea's! And there are just as many adults as kids should I name some? Nikki311 , LAX , Think Blue, Carribean HQ, Gavyn Sykes. I could go on for hour's. Beside's we are all established editor's here on Wikipedia no matter our age, it's not our view points It' Wikipedia's! <font-family:"Tahoma">#1 Metallica Fan Your Hancock 18:33, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Yes Metallica I got your point. You're not to be questioned and you want me to kill myself. It's been noted. Mr.Krycek (talk) 22:51, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

I suggest Mr. Krycek, to remain civil and assume good-faith in discussions, as for MaskedSuperAgent, no one said I was god. I was simply explaining why the page should not contain any more sections that what it currently has, as this page is long as it is.SRX 22:55, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

You're right SRX. However you should also assume good faith in the additions I made to the Kofi Kingston page. Fair enough is it not? (Mr.Krycek (talk) 02:04, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

All I did was reword your sentence, which is thus, assuming good faith. Please read WP:AGF and WP:BF to distinguish good and bad faith.SRX 02:07, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

big daddy v

what happend to him hes not been released and i cant find him on this page and every time this page is unlcoked its vanderlisde thanks KCDavis 172.189.235.59 (talk) 15:01, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for noticing, he has been re-added under inactive talent for ECW.--SRX 15:11, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

The reason why Big Daddy V is inactive is because wwe sent him home to loose weight. --80.2.51.38 (talk) 17:16, 17 May 2008 (UTC)chrispowellathome

SCSA

austin hasent made a apperiance in iver 6 months it should just say public relations cuz be fair its missleading someone reads this page and think oh ausin is gonna make a guest apperance but he dont and its been like that for 6 months if he makes another apperance then put it back down but we could put rock there as makeing apperances cuz he made one last year and this year around wrestlmania so either add rock or take apperance bit off of steve austin 172.206.253.15 (talk) 12:37, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

yea good point ill do it KCDavis (talk) 17:06, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Thats what "occasional" means. However, if Austin does not make an appearance in another couple of months, then it will be removed.--SRX 17:29, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Stop IP's from vandalizing this page.

What do we do to block IP's from editing this page? There has been a huge amount of vandalism over the past few days. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Doppy88 (talk • contribs) 04:11, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

You can get the page protected. MATT^talk 04:35, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

I made a request at WP:RFPP this morning, it hasn't been commented on for some reason. — Κaiba 04:36, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

I have the page on my watchlist but I know what y'all mean. We need to put a end to this. <font-family:"Tahoma">#1 Metallica Fan Your Hancock 15:40, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Semi-protected, for three days, this should stop them for the time being while everything is sorted good. :) — Κaiba 19:24, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Recent Additions To The Rosters

Lena Yada - ECW Eve Torres - Smackdown

these are wrestlers they are just in the developmental territories for the time being. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.85.139.197 (talk) 00:28, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

O.K, and what are we supposed to do? <font-family:"Tahoma">#1 Metallica Fan Your Hancock 15:56, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Katie Lea and Paul Burchill

Are they really considerd a tag team? <font-family:"Tahoma">#1 Metallica Fan Your Hancock 16:01, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Any one? <font-family:"Tahoma">ZACH 17:33, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

If these guys are a tag team after one tag match together, then lets add the Brothers of Destruction as well. How about we also add the entire ECW roster as a tag team as they fought Triple H and Mr. Kennedy a few weeks back on RAW. They all shouldn't be listed as they don't team on a regular basis. ^{-GuffasBorgz7-} 20:47, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

They've tagged in handicap matches numerous times, not just once. Gavyn Sykes (talk) 22:47, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

How is it even a legitimate handicap match? It's always Paul Burchill beating up a jobber and Katie Lea making the pinfall. If it was Katie Lea actually in the ring herself: tagging in and out and wrestling by herself, then I'd be more inclined to agree. — Κaiba 22:58, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

i agree —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.4.228.173 (talk) 08:40, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

They are wrestling as a tandem regardless, unlike say Trish and Christian when Trish teamed with Christian only once to gang up on Chris Jericho. And yes, handicap matches are still handicap matches. Haleth (talk) 12:51, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Vince McMahon

I'd list Vince on the Raw page (as WWE Owner/Chairman, occasional wrestler), because with the Million Dollar giveaway, he's going to be on a lot more, and he's been making more appearances as of late anyway.

No need for "Interim GM", because Vince is the boss and doesn't need the extra title. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Obmmrac (talk • contribs) 19:50, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Vince has appeared on Raw 3 of the last 4 weeks, he'll be on again this coming week to explain the million $ giveaway, and since Raw has no GM, he'll probably be the de-facto GM/authority figure.

Ted Dibiase Sr. has appeared on Raw the last 2 weeks to help push his son, and he has a new book coming out, so he'll be making appearances to promote it.

Vjmlhds May 29, 2008 22:59 (UTC)

You keep doing this. You assume things without sources to back you up. You never know what WWE is going to do, so you can't add thinks that are likely to happen, because they are not yet confirmed. iMatthew _T.C. 23:04, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

I will agree with adding McMahon to the list under Other on air talent, but there is no source that states he is the interim GM, even though he owns WWE, still it has not been said anywhere in WWE that he was the interim GM. Second, we don't even know if DiBiase, Sr. will be at ringside every time with his son, we cannot add that because we are not a crystal ball, and no source has stated otherwise.--SRX^--LatinoHeat 23:05, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

I never said he was going to be interim GM, nor did I give him the title, all I said was he was appearing more lately and would be appearing more in the future (as per WWE.com as he'll explain how the million $ giveaway works next week).

As far as DiBiase goes, he has been on the last 2 weeks but, I'll agree to holding off on him until Ted Jr's 1st match.

No Sr. at ringside, no adding him to the list, if the old man comes out with him, than he's on, OK?

Vjmlhds May 29, 2008 23:25 (UTC)

If its a one time thing, then no. But if he comes out 3 or more times, then yes, we can assume he will be his son's manager.SRX^--LatinoHeat 23:39, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Fair enough.

Vjmlhds May 29, 2008 23:47 (UTC)

MAYBE Development Talents?=

I've noticed that there are a number of wrestlers who frequently wrestle in FCW that have not been confirmed to have signed WWE contracts. These wrestlers include: Brandon Groom, Gabe Tuft, Mr. Yamamoto, and Vic Adams. Until some source comes up that says they've been signed, I don't think they should be added, but I think we should keep a lookout. More than likely, they are under contract considering how many shows they've worked for FCW. (I know OVW had outside talent, but FCW is WWE-run) Dahumorist (talk) 17:20, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Gabe Tuft is under contract according to the UPW (where he trained originally) website[1].Ashman80 (talk) 15:03, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Independent Contractors

WWE Wrestlers are not employees of the company they are independent contractors. If you had bothered to check my reference. The WWE Corporate website states and I quote. "Our Superstars are highly trained and motivated independent contractors whose compensation is tied to the revenue that they help generate." That is from the company itself. So please don't vandalize this article by taking down the proven fact I have put up here. To take down a proven and reference fact is vandalism.

http://corporate.wwe.com/company/events.jsp

Perhaps a article name change is in order? Mshake3 (talk) 03:25, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Oh dude...believe me when I tell you that this has been like pulling teeth. All wrestlers are independent contractors and I showed some people people a plethora of stuff showing that but they refuse to believe it. Even now people want to take this out. Like it doesn't exist. This is the third major edit war that I have been a part of and I've been right all three times. This should say something...lol. But yeah, this thing has been a chore.SChaos1701 (talk) 04:08, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

You know, I said that without even looking at that big discussion in the project. And believe me, I feel your frustration. I don't know if the article should be renamed (maybe List of WWE talent), but this note should be here, no question. Mshake3 (talk) 05:26, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Hey dude, can you undo Darrenhusted's edit. I've already done 3 in a 24 hour period and like last time, he refuses to see the truth even though what I've put up is properly referenced and indisputable and from WWE Corporate. It people like him and a few others like him that give Wikipedia such a bad name. No wonder no one wants to use this place as a source. It's editors want to ignore fact and treat this as their own personal play ground.SChaos1701 (talk) 15:41, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Darrenhusted has never even edited the article, or at least not any time recently. Double check what you're saying before you badmouth someone who's been a great editor on this website for years. Check the page history. The Hybrid 01:24, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

I checked and I misread, he messed with the discussion page. My bad. But he is still an avid user of Policy Wonkery so until that stops, my opinion stands.SChaos1701 (talk) 04:02, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Never confuse a respect for the policies with wonkery, ever. There's a difference between being legalistic and anti-anarchist. And remember, that essay about wonkery is just one man's opinion. There's a reason it isn't allowed into actual Wikipedia space like other essays. The Hybrid 04:10, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

If it walks like a duck....well...you know the rest.SChaos1701 (talk) 06:41, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

You, sir, are confused, and if you base your editing philosophy off of an unofficial essay written by a controversial editor, you are also to be pitied. The Hybrid 07:18, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Just like I was proven right in at least two other major edit wars?SChaos1701 (talk) 17:27, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

You haven't been in a "major" edit war yet; only minor disputes which have nothing to do with this conversation anyway. And for the record, if one of the disputes you're referring to is the one about the sources, I was right. Anyway, I'm making a general statement about editing philosophy. If you allow other people to shape your actions for fear of fitting within some arbitrary label (that they just made up out of nowhere), then you are going to have problems. The Hybrid 19:30, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

And for the record, I only see Darren reverting vandalism on this talk page. What did he mess up? The Hybrid 04:14, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

This is my only edit to this page in months but I have no idea how this has anything to do with SChaos. Darrenhusted (talk) 08:16, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Like I already said said, I misread.SChaos1701 (talk) 17:29, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

?

Jonathan coachman is currently working for espn. i'm not aloud to change it because i just made account but just so people know. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ljjck1ll4z4life (talk • contribs) 02:32, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Avoiding the Edit War

Regarding this revert, I'd like to see what others think of the matter. The changes made were:

1. Removing an extra line space at the top of the page
2. Since "kayfabe" was the first word in the sentence, I made it capitalized.
3. Brought William Regal to "Unassigned talent" because even though he is suspended, he left by being "fired from Raw", so therefore he is not currently assigned to a brand.
4. In the Finlay reference, it stated he is a road agent for the WWF, clearly a mistake, so I fixed it to "WWE"
5. I've moved Jonathon Coachman to Unassigned talent, as he was replaced on the SmackDown announce team, and his current status with the company remains to be seen. But for now, he is not assigned a brand.
6. Carlito and Santino Marella have not tagged in a few weeks, due to Marella's feud with Cousin Sal.
7. Wang Yang and Moore for whatever reason, have not tagged in weeks as well, I believe.

All of those edits were correct and constructive. NickSparrow, why did you revert them, as your edit summary did not make sense. Please respond before you revert for whatever reason. iMatthew _T.C. 10:23, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

I agree with everything but #6 and #7 because Marella and Carlito were in the title hunt for the World Tag Team Championship, Marella's feud hasn't interfered in that in any way, they tagged last week. Wang Yang and Moore, however, they tag on occasions, so I say they should remain as a tag team.SRX^--LatinoHeat 11:39, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

is this a reaable source

Can u watch smackdown on sky plus if u can dont watching smackdown on sky plus before its on TV proper can u use that as a reaible source for new things added e.g. roster change —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.2.49.239 (talk) 16:52, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Yes because this wikipedia is not limited to the United States, if it airs on "WWE" TV, its reliable, meaning anywhere around the world on WWE Television.--SRX^--LatinoHeat 16:55, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

D'Lo Brown Signed

It's up on WWE.com. I don't know how to site stuff, so if you do, add him and the sitation. —Preceding unsigned comment added by CrystallixRed (talk • contribs) 17:38, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

 Done --SRX^--LatinoHeat 18:05, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Alka Seltzer

On the WWE smackdown roster, there is an Alka Seltzer toy by the name of "Speedy". He has his own biography and finishing move. Should he be mentioned on the roster? 76.110.82.251 (talk) 22:22, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

No. WWE has done that many times before. It is just to promote a movie, show, or something along the lines of that. It will be taken off latter.--^--WillC-- 22:23, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Alright. 76.110.82.251 (talk) 22:34, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Dave Kapoor being listed twice

Is it really necessary to have him under inactive Smackdown superstars as well as under Creative Writers? I for one find it redundant. He's either one or the other. Miztahrogers (talk) 01:04, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

william regal

he issuspended sowhy is he not in the inactive talent on raw —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.96.137.3 (talk) 18:10, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

I think its because he was "fired". Also, The Undertaker is not on the Smackdown list because he was "fired". 76.110.82.251 (talk) 02:38, 7 June 2008 (UTC)