Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Professional wrestling

WP:PW	Talk • Article alerts • Assessment • Members list • New articles • Notability • Recognized content • Sanctions • Sources • Style guide • Templates • Top priority articles

WikiProject Professional Wrestling
Professional wrestling as a whole is under general sanctions
Shortcut WT:PW Welcome to the WikiProject Professional wrestling discussion page. Please use this page to discuss issues regarding professional wrestling related articles, project guidelines, ideas, suggestions and questions. Thank you for visiting!

Archives

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10
11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20
21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30
31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40
41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50
51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60
61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70
71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80
81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90
91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100
101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110
111, 112

This page has archives. Sections older than 30 days may be automatically archived by when more than 1 section is present.

Ordering of lists in "personnel" templates

In templates such as WWE personnel, "Male wrestlers" appears above "Female wrestlers". There's no good reason for this that I can see and Wikipedia policy is that lists should be alphabetical unless there's a clear reason for ordering otherwise. I'd therefore propose that the order be reversed unless anyone has any thoughts otherwise. McPhail (talk) 12:18, 13 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@McPhail: If there is no specific policy/guideline about it, then using A-Z order sounds OK. Mann Mann (talk) 04:36, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It was probably for the fact that professional wrestling is a male dominant "sport". --JDC808 ♫ 09:13, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe a mix between male dominant sport and two different divisions? NJPW has separated tables for HW and Jr. wrestlers

It does seem to be separated by division, which I think is fine. I don't really have an objection to merging the two together, but I also don't think the current format is problematic. — Czello 12:35, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The current format is not problematic but actually it is very helpful for both editors and readers. What McPhail says is about changing the order of headings/sub-sections. e.g. take a look at List of WWE personnel => Current format: Roster => 2.2 Raw => 2.2.1 Male wrestlers + 2.2.2 Female wrestlers. McPhail's suggestion: Roster => 2.2 Raw => 2.2.1 Female wrestlers + 2.2.2 Male wrestlers. And applying same order to other sections, lists, and templates. Mann Mann (talk) 13:00, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Or we can use a format like List of UFC champions: Men and Women. Looks better than male and female in my opinion and matches with alphabetical order. Mann Mann (talk) 13:04, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with just changing it to Men and Women. --JDC808 ♫ 14:02, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Czello and McPhail: Your opinion? Mann Mann (talk) 16:31, 21 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Mann Mann:: on a more general level, I'd question why we divide up rosters by sex in the first place - WWE, AEW, etc don't do this. But if we feel this is necessary, happy with "men" and "women" (though obviously we wouldn't say "men wrestlers"). McPhail (talk) 09:35, 22 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know about any specific policy/guideline for gender-based sections on articles, lists, or navboxes. But it's similar to WP categories. In my opinion, such sections and sub-sections are helpful, and they work better for readability and organizing . For example, a reader who is only interested in WWE women's division does not need to browse wrestlers one by one. He/She opens the related article, list, or navbox. Then goes to the relevant section that he/she looks for it. Plus we do not need to use the format "X wrestlers". Using Men and Women is enough just like that UFC list. Do we really need to mention "wrestlers"? If omitting "wrestlers" from the headings is confusing, then we can use an alternative option like Men's division and Women's division. But I don't think using "men" and "women" would cause confusion. Mann Mann (talk) 10:02, 22 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"Men" and "women" is fine with me — Czello 09:43, 22 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I think male wrestlers/female wrestlers divide them from referees and other on air talent (men and women who aren't wrestlers or don't wrestle) --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 11:19, 22 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Both List of WWE personnel and Template:WWE personnel have sections/groups like Referees, Other on-air talent, and etc. So it would be fine with "men" and "women". However, if you guys think it's confusing for most readers, then as I said we can use men's division and women's division. Anyways, it's not a big deal for me. I just shared my suggestions. The current revision is OK for me but my preference is a format similar to that UFC list. But if most users think male/female format works better for our project, then let's forget my suggestions and then continue discussing McPhail's concern (A-Z order). Mann Mann (talk) 14:14, 22 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

So...should we stick with female/male or switch to men/women? McPhail (talk) 11:01, 3 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

PCW Ultra

Hello, WikiProject,

This is a brand new article about professional wrestling by a fairly new editor and I'm hoping some here who are experienced content creators can give it a look. Thank you. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:10, 20 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for bringing this up. I'm not sure how "experienced" I am, but having a glance it appears to have been supported with a primary source and a bunch of sources to past results (which make the article look very listy). I can't find much else on google, so it sounds like an AfD case to me. GhostOfDanGurney (talk) 14:35, 20 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PCW Ultra. I've never heard of this company. starship .paint (exalt) 13:47, 17 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Number of Raw episodes

Hi, does anyone have a definitive source for how many episodes of Raw there have been? WrestlingData has it at 1487 (once it updates for yesterday), while The Smackdown Hotel has it at 1507. Does anyone know why this discrepancy exists? — Czello 11:35, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Cagematch concurs with the 1487 figure. Can't think what the 20 episodes discrepancy would be - maybe Thursday RAW Thursday? McPhail (talk) 09:39, 25 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The Smackdown Hotel numbers Raw 1000 as #1000, and Raw 1400 (March 23, 2020) as #1400, so the discrepancy would have come since then. Indeed, Cagematch and TSH agree with each other all the way until Night 2 of the 2020 draft, Raw #1429 on October 12th. The next episode, October 19th 2020, Cagematch counts as #1430 while TSH jumps 20 slots to #1450. So it is 1487, and TSH just goofed up and continued counting from there. Pinguinn 🐧 04:53, 26 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Makes sense, thanks both. — Czello 19:33, 26 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Good sleuthing! McPhail (talk) 21:32, 27 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Level 5 articles

FYI, since we've discussed discussed Level 5 selections in the past... Vince Russo is now on the list. He was apparently added last month.[1] We had discussed many names previously and he wasn't one of them and I think there's a reason for that.LM2000 (talk) 10:23, 26 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Just thought I'd toss in that this was a good faith edit by an editor who felt that the Professional Wrestling category was a better fit than Prose Writers. He was originally added to the Level 5 list as a writer in this edit: [2]. I don't see any consensus in any page history to add him, so I think it would be fine to delete. There are currently 31 articles in the 30-article category, so it's one over as it is. GaryColemanFan (talk) 17:32, 26 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Since no one has objected I removed him from the list.--67.70.101.149 (talk) 23:33, 29 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Requested moves for discussion

"Butch Miller (wrestler)" to "Bushwhacker Butch"

"Luke Williams (wrestler)" to "Bushwhacker Luke"

"Taz (wrestler)" to "Tazz"

McPhail (talk) 19:45, 16 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

- Also, "Kevin Wacholz" to "Nailz". McPhail (talk) 20:52, 16 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

January 4

There is a discussion in the talk page of the Talk:January 4 Tokyo Dome Show. The issue, if the article should include the WrestleKingdom events that takes place on Jan 5 (and Jan 8). If you want, you can give your opinion. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 13:16, 20 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move for discussion

"Ferrin Barr Jr." to "Jimmy Jack Funk". McPhail (talk) 21:04, 21 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

- Also, "Kim Nielsen (wrestler)" to "Desire (wrestler)". McPhail (talk) 21:48, 22 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Title changes when a taped show has yet to broadcast

I've recently reverted an edit which listed a title change that hadn't yet aired. My reasoning is that if the show hasn't aired, the title change is not yet official (the promotion's website, for example, still shows the previous champion). What is this wikiproject's rule on this sort of thing? When do we alter articles to reflect the current champion, if this is technically something in the "future"? — Czello 13:55, 23 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Have reliable wrestling sources covered this if so it should be covered. looking at Talk:Jake Hager there was a consensus to cover his 2010 MITB contact cash in against Chris Jericho before SmackDown aired on TV.--67.70.101.198 (talk) 16:07, 23 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]