Jump to content

Talk:WrestleMania 25

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 81.36.175.63 (talk) at 14:24, 16 April 2009 (→‎Colours and brands). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

WikiProject iconProfessional wrestling C‑class Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconWrestleMania 25 is within the scope of WikiProject Professional wrestling, an attempt to improve and standardize articles related to professional wrestling. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, visit the project to-do page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to discussions.Professional wrestlingWikipedia:WikiProject Professional wrestlingTemplate:WikiProject Professional wrestlingProfessional wrestling articles
CThis article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Final discussion

This is the final discussion. Majority vote ends this thing. One week, after one week, everything is done. Who believes the article should be named WrestleMania XXV? Who believes it should be named 25th Anniversary of WrestleMania? The end result is the final one, whatever happens. No more moves, no more discussions, no more involving admins. This ends it now and once and for all. I believe it should be WrestleMania XXV for the record.--WillC 14:36, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This really should be added to WP:LAME. -- Scorpion0422 14:38, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
For what? I don't know what you are getting at.--WillC 14:49, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Wait, why is WrestleMania XXV being redirected to 25th Anniversary of WrestleMania when we JUST started this discussion? SuperSilver901 17:15, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
As in support the move, and support your statement above Will. Sorry too many tabs open. Amended to reflect. Darrenhusted (talk) 15:40, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose; the official name was 25th Anniversary of WrestleMania and like 13, 2000, X-Seven, and X8 which all have articles titled with their official title it should be 25th Anniversary even if we all know it was the 24th anniversary. No-one calls it ex, ex, vee so if you're moving it to what people pronounce it was then it should be WrestleMania 25/Twenty Five. Tony2Times (talk) 15:21, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Exactly, yet the article is XLIII because that's its official title and how it is presented. We may all call it WrestleMania 25/XXV but its official title is 25th Anniversary. Tony2Times (talk) 16:58, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Who is to say that is the offcial title? Bound for Glory IV was never referred to as Bound for Glory 4/IV. It was just Bound for Glory. Who is to say that Bound for Glory IV was the offical title, even when they didn't even write four in articles? They also have three different names for WrestleMania. 25th annniversary is better to advertise than WrestleMania 25. More things they can do and make the event mean more.--WillC 17:04, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Whose to say what is the official title? WWE is who. And they said with their logo, with their rhetoric and with their stage sign that it is the 25th Anniversary of WrestleMania. The name WrestleMania XXV was never used during 2009, only during 2008 just like the name WrestleMania 2001 was only used the previous year. I don't know what this third name is. If Bound For Glory IV was never called it, then that's a case for it to be moved to BFG (2008). I'm not saying it should be, but that argument works against moving this article seeing as BFG's article is based on the typeset of the poster, calling this article WM XXV would contradict that. Tony2Times (talk) 17:20, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
See the logo nor poster are what we should go by. There is no special cases where we should go by the poster or not. In the new Sacrifice poster AJ looks like he is in Gears of War, should we state that is his new gimmick because of that, no. The wrestlemania poster has two names. The 25th anniversary of WrestleMania and WrestleMania: 25th anniversary. WWE just contradicted themselves with their own poster. Too many names.--WillC 17:26, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
And WrestleMania 13 was also called 13 WrestleMania(!) Tony2Times (talk) 18:42, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support I support this being WrestleMania XXV. I don't know if we put we're opposing the 25th Anniversary of WrestleMania by putting oppose or supporting WrestleMania XXV by putting support. SuperSilver901 17:25, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose throughout wrestlemania it was called the 25th anniversary of Wrestlemania and even announced by Howard Finkel "Welcome to the 25th Anniversary of Wrestlemania" Adster95 17:25, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support technically next year is the 25th anniversary and this IS Wrestlemania XXV not The 25th Anniversary of Wrestlemania despite what WWE says.LifeStroke420 (talk) 19:04, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Mshake moved it without discussion, so I moved it back (so those saying "Support move" were supporting WrestleMania XXV). Yes WWE mostly used 25th Anniversary of WrestleMania, but they have also continued using WrestleMania. The last consensus (which was just last week) was to keep it at WrestleMania XXV and I support that. This is ridiculous and petty by those who keep trying to put it somewhere else, it's like those who start a AFD request only hours after previous one failed. If the consensus stays at having it at WrestleMania XXV, it needs to be move protected so that certain vandal editors (and they know who they are) can't keep moving it despite knowing that general consensus is against them. TJ Spyke 19:06, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Wrestlemania XXV. Most news sources refer to it as that. Examples of such are [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7]. All of these RS use either "Wrestlemania XXV" or "Wrestlemania 25" predominantly. We should look beyond primary sources to see what the WP:COMMONNAME is. This is enough to convince me that it is the most common name for the article.Firestorm Talk 19:11, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support WrestleMania XXV -- per WP:Naming conflict. 1)It wasn't the 25th anniversary of WrestleMania 2)That can cause a mishap here with redirects, since WrestleMania XXVI is actually the 25th anniversary. 3)Like NAMECON states, the title should be neutral (the chronological title) and the naming issue can be covered in the article, which it is, so there is no more need to move it.--Truco 22:43, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose the vote altogether per Wikipedia:Consensus#Consensus can change and Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not#Wikipedia is not a democracy. Majority votes violate policy, and even "straw poll" results can't be considered permanently binding. GaryColemanFan (talk) 23:32, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support (page remains as WrestleMania XXV ...Could we just drop it already? It is clear that the community has decided to keep the page under this name. This continuous disruption is pointless and unnecessary. The community would be better off going about their business than to spend another second on this ridiculous subject.--UnquestionableTruth-- 03:37, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Colours and brands

I have a question. Why in the divas battle royal table you put the brand if the brand can be reconocided buy the colour grey, blue and red?? --81.36.175.63 (talk) 20:44, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Because Red = Raw which is the color on their logo, Blue = Smackdown which is also on their logo, Gray = Past divas for some reason and purple = ECW for some reason. SuperSilver901 20:51, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The ECW logo used to be purple, that's probably why. TJ Spyke 21:06, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think he means why list the name of the brand if the colours tell you them. My answer would be because I'm colour defective and barely able to distinguish the difference. Tony2Times (talk) 22:45, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Tony, you are right. We have to think of users with disabilities. Someone who is color blind should be able to tell what brand they were on. TJ Spyke 22:51, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
In addition, the ECW divas should be in gray or a variation of black, as that is their color which they are represented by.--Truco 22:54, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think that you don't understand me. I say that in top of the table, you say that the divas in blue are of SD, the divas in grey are in ECW and the divas in red are in RAW. I say that is ridiculous write in the table Brand, between Diva and Order of elimination, because we know the brand seeing the colour. --81.36.175.63 (talk) 14:00, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

TJ just answered that...some people can't SEE colors or have a hard time seeing them, so they make a legend of what each color means, and not everyone will know red means Raw (sounds ridiculous but I'm sure there's someone out there)--Lord Dagon (talk) 14:08, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, OK. Sorry, I don't understand It. Thanks for your time. --81.36.175.63 (talk) 14:24, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:WrestleMania_25&oldid=284214639"