Talk:Total Nonstop Action Wrestling

Can this image be put on the TNA article?

File:Blmpu.gif

Would it be alright to insert this image somewhere on the page? It is the intro video that is at the start of every TNA production ever since they went HD in October. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Conor-A-Dowds (talk • contribs) 15:46, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Animated GIF's are rarely used on Wikipedia (they take too long to load for people with slower connections and can be a general problem). It doesn't really add anything to the article, so I would say no. TJ Spyke 15:50, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

TNA Ownership

There's a good article here about TNA's ownership: http://www.cygy.com/2009/08/tna-wrestling-ownership-timeline.html

We should somehow incorporate some of this information onto the page. Canamerican (talk) 19:45, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

TNA Sold

Jeff Jarrett has sold his TNA shares to Bob Carter: http://www.cygy.com/2009/08/bob-carter-purchases-jeff-jarretts-tna.html 70.68.139.248 (talk) 04:04, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Well, since the website is currently offline, the article cannot be checked for reliability. Besides, if Double J's stake had been sold, there would have been some announcement made about it. In other words, it's complete BULLS#IT. 67.173.117.222 (talk) 19:32, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

No, not bullshit IP. Since TNA is privately owned, they do not have to announce when shares are bought or sold. People and companies buy/sell shares in companies all the time without announcing it. You also provide no source for Jarrett owning 22% of TNA. TJ Spyke 21:33, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Well, TJ, your ONLY source for Carter & Panda Energy completely owning TNA is down, therefore rendering that source unreliable at least until the site is back up. And, if anything, there would have at least been SOME mention of it in wrestling news, which there WASN'T. Besides, IF it was true, more than ONE wrestling news site would be reporting it. Besides the fact that ONE site reporting it wouldn't make it reliable. Aside from the fact of the question of Cygy's reliability. So, for now, your tidbit can only be taken as a rumor. And, until your rumor is confirmed, there's no reason to remove the piece of info about Double J still owning 28%. 98.193.77.134 (talk) 02:57, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

There's no source that Jarrett owns 28% of TNA, so there no reason to have a unsouced claim. He may or may not still have a minority share in TNA, but no source he owns 28%. TJ Spyke 17:05, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Well, according to some sources I've read, after Panda acquired 72% of TNA, Double J bought his father's stake. Well, simple math tells us that 100 - 72 = 28, therefore Double J would own 28% of TNA. And, technically, your tidbit of Panda completely owning TNA is an unsourced claim, since the website it's coming from is down at the moment. 67.173.117.222 (talk) 18:45, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

The website being temporarily down does NOT mean it is untrue. There is no reliable source for how much Panda Energy owns. Hell, even if there is a source for them owning 72% that does not mean Jeff owns 28% (other people can own small amounts too). A source being down does not mean it needs to be removed, that is what {{deadlink}} is for. TJ Spyke 18:54, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Well, here's a link to a Facebook page about TNA's history:Talk Wrestling Online: TNA Ownership - A Timeline. According to that article, Panda bought 72% of TNA from the Jarretts. Jeff then bought his father, Jerry's, remaning 28% stake in the company. Now, NOWHERE in that timeline does it mention ANYTHING about Panda acquiring Jeff's stake, so that must mean that Double J still owns 28% of the company. If you want, I can use that page as a reference to Double J still owning some of TNA. 67.173.117.222 (talk) 23:19, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

A random persons Facebook page is not a reliable source. TJ Spyke 23:27, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Well, technically, neither is a website that's currently down. And, for the fact that it's only ONE website. It would have to reported by more than one site for the information to be verifiable.67.173.117.222 (talk) 01:26, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

UPDATE:Well, apparently, the source for Carter buying the rest of Jarrett's stake is NO MORE. Tried going to the weblink and the article is no longer there. So, in other words, there is NO RELIABLE SOURCE for Robert Carter owning all of TNA. In other words, your link is NO GOOD anymore! 67.173.117.222 (talk) 02:28, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

The source was still reliable, and Internet Archive takes care of the deadlink. TJ Spyke 22:46, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

The keyword here is was. It's no longer reliable because that article is GONE! And, I tried Internet Archive with that link and NOTHING shows up. So, once again:In other words, your link is NO GOOD anymore! So, please, try to get that through your thick skull this time. 67.173.117.222 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 04:14, 11 March 2010 (UTC).

First, stop attacking editors or you will be blocked. Second, see Wikipedia:Linkrot. Just because a link goes dead does NOT mean it becomes unreliable or that it should be deleted. TJ Spyke 21:09, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

The link would still be reliable if it was still in existence. But since it is not, any information it covers has to be removed if a replacement can not be found.--WillC 21:28, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Knockouts Championship is not Vacant!!!

Seriously, i have changed it back to ODB about 3 times now, but people keep changing it back to Vacant, I am aware that Mick foley is holding on to the title till No Surrender, but the TNA website still lists ODB as Champ and i think we should go with that source.--205.122.107.14 (talk) 16:46, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Unfortunately there have been no changes in the last week except for vandalism. The pay per view is in the next 24 hours so it will have to stay as is. I agree with you though - the title was held up and not vacated. Podgy Stuffn (talk) 11:25, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

World Elite

I put this here because I am assuming many TNA-smart wikipedia users come across this page. Can someone please make a seperate page for the world elite. world elite currently redirects to Eric Young. —Preceding unsigned comment added by IsaKazimi (talk • contribs) 06:22, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Not notable enough at this time.--WillC 22:51, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

I would say they are as notable as the MEM...no? —Preceding unsigned comment added by IsaKazimi (talk • contribs) 05:29, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

MEM lasted for a year, World Elite have lasted for two to three months.--WillC 11:07, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Fair enough.— Preceding unsigned comment added by IsaKazimi (talk • contribs)

Championships

I noticed that the TNA Legends Championship was called the "TNA Global Championhip". Is There a reason for this? In the meantime, I'm changing it to Legends. 99.50.127.187 (talk) 05:11, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

They renamed it on Impact!.--WillC 06:22, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Except it seems to be nothing more than Eric Young referring to it as that. TNA still calls it the Legends Championship, and the fact that 95% of TNA's shows are on US soil (which means his storyline threat is meaningless) means it likely won't last long. This seems to be like when Lance Storm "renamed" the WCW United States Championship as the WCW Canadian Championship (and "renaming" the Cruiserweight and Hardcore titles too), or when Bradshaw renamed the WWE Hardcore Championship as the WWE Texas Hardcore Championship. In other words, it's an unofficial renaming. The title is still officially the TNA Legends Championship. TJ Spyke 15:16, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

I agree with TJ. Note Lance Storm's renaming of numerous titles during his reigns.^{--UnquestionableTruth--} 20:11, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

On TNAWrestling.com's roster page, check out the championship roll call.

They have officially renamed the title to the Global Championship.

Vjmlhds 21:16, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

So? WCW did the same thing when Storm "renamed" the belt, or when a nWo wrestler held the "nWo World Heavyweight Championship". If TNA continues calling it that after Young loses it, then it can be agreed to be a real change. TJ Spyke 21:23, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Except WCW never called the WCW title the nWo title- only the nWo did. Graphics/website always said WCW. I can't remember of they did change it for Storm, but the fact is if the company calls it that, then it's official. They can call their titles whatever they want and change them every week if they wish- when you start a wrestling company feel free to do the same. --208.38.59.163 (talk) 21:09, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

When Storm held the titles, WCW DID call them what he did, but they stopped once he lost the titles. Doesn't make it a official name change. TJ Spyke 22:04, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Actually, that's pretty much the dictionary definition of an official name change. They officially changed it then they officially changed it back. What does it take to make it an official title change, your personal approval? An executive order from the President of the United States? --208.38.59.163 (talk) 00:06, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

TJ, TNA have clearly tried to show as much as they can that the title has been renamed. Even having Nash take the title and say it is no longer the Legends Title, that it is dead, and now it is just the Global Title. It doesn't matter what WCW did, this is today and TNA. TNA have renamed it, so we reflect that, not try to see future events.--WillC 02:26, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Second Largest?

Is there a reference for this, i would of thought the japanese promotions were larger —Preceding unsigned comment added by Matthewdavies (talk • contribs) 02:43, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

TNA has it's TV show shown all over the world and its PPV's shown all over the world, neither of which is true for any Japanese promotion. Some of them are big, but I don't think they are bigger than TNA. TJ Spyke 02:50, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Probably would be best to remove it anyway. It seems more like an opinion, rather than a fact.--WillC 03:45, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

I was thinking along those lines as well. Also what makes a promotion the "second biggest" because in terms of crowd numbers TNA isnt second--Matthewdavies (talk) 04:42, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Under that logic the NCAA football is bigger than the NFL because more total people attend NCAA football games. It's your OPINION that it should be based on crowds. If you want to talk about the amount of people who see the event, it's again TNA. More people see TNA than any Japanese promotion. TJ Spyke 22:28, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

I would argue that. Japanense promotions gather thousands at their shows plus millions see them via dvds, ppvs, etc. That is just one varible. Would be best to remove, until a reliable source is presented as such. I would say TNA is the second largest, but I got no proof of that.--WillC 23:06, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

I think perhaps the best judge is revenue made, and i dont know what the numbers are for that --Matthewdavies (talk) 23:10, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

I would be skeptical that "millions" see the DVDs and PPVs (first, the PPV's air only in Japan. Same for DVDs, anyone outside of Japan would have to import them). I do agree that the wording should at least be changed (maybe back to "second largest in North America", like it used to be). As for revenue, we will never know since I think WWE is the only publically traded wrestling company. TNA is a private company, which means they do not have to disclose their financial records. TJ Spyke 23:15, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Hogan

Without turning this into a edit war i think the paragraph should be included. Hogan is perhaps the only wrestler known by the mainstream public and is head and shoulders above any of the names you've mentioned. It has been lauded as a major deal by both TNA management and wrestling pundits. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Matthewdavies (talk • contribs) 23:42, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Yes his signing has gotten a lot of hype, but we don't know if it will actually be important in the history of the company. Maybe 1 or 2 sentences, but I don't see the need for a whole paragraph (yet alone an entire section). TJ Spyke 00:04, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

What about puting him in the celeb section? I looks like he'll be taking on a non wrestling job (and he is a pretty big star) and we can expand his section if anything meaningful comes out of it. --Matthewdavies (talk) 01:00, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Hogan and January 4th Impact

Both deserve a mention due to it being referred to as the "biggest night in TNA history" and the introduction of some of the biggest stars in the business either returning or debuting —Preceding unsigned comment added by Daddycool1989 (talk • contribs) 09:22, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

TNA Article Name

Is TNA Called TNA Wrestling LLC Or TNA Entertainment LLC Kreyg ^Talk

Why?--WillC 06:42, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

The corporate name is (as the article says) TNA Entertainment LLC. The promotions name though is Total Nonstop Action Wrestling. TJ Spyke 21:00, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

Semi-protection For Total Nonstop Action Wrestling article

this article needs some protection because constantly I seeing random IP's changeing things like putting WWE owns TNA and that TNA is a brand of WWE and now im seeing they are changeing the owners and putting vince mcmahon is the owner of tna Kreyg ^Talk 15:40, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

I just requested and got it protected. For future reference though, you can request protection yourself at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection. TJ Spyke 15:36, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

TNA Monday January 4th

The article says March 8th will be the first live monday edition of iMPACT, but as anyone that has been watching TNA before Monday January 4th knows it was Monday January 4th —Preceding unsigned comment added by Planbsk8erb (talk • contribs) 02:21, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

How Big Does TNA needs To be To get the page TNA to redirect to just the Total Nonstop Action Wrestling Page

I was wondering how big do they need to be Iceman247 (talk) 15:57, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

The acronym TNA would have to in everyway make people think wrestling right off the bat. So pretty big.--WillC 18:22, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

"Primarily a wrestling business?

TNA's business focus is mainly on professional wrestling

I strongly disagree with this line. TNA is a wrestling promotion. To say the company is primarily a wrestling business would mean it is a large part, but there are significant smaller parts involved in the company.--Screwball23 talk 03:36, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

What else do they do that is not involved in wrestling in any way?--WillC 05:37, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

I agree with WillC what else would TNA be involved with iCEMAN247 22:04, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

TNA is also pretty famous as a retirement home for retired WCW and WWF guys. Mick Foley, for example, retired from WWE and now collects a paycheck (IE social security check) from TNA. The Nasty Boys are also a recent addition to this practice. TNA is kind enough to let these old wrestlers put together matches on TV every so often.

Hornswoggle?

as i recall hornswoggle is still in wwe and therefore is not the tna champion. can someone change it cause i'm afraid i might mess it up. thank you. 75.52.120.106 (talk) 04:01, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

It was vandalism.--WillC 06:28, 9 March 2010 (UTC)