Jump to content

User talk:Czello

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by TheDarkPoison (talk | contribs) at 16:39, 6 December 2013 (→Helmet: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Archive

Archives


WCW Tag Team title

Hi. I have one question. Do you think Waltman won the WCW Tag Team title? It looks like a substitution, not a champion. WWE doesn't list the reign [1] solie only says "The Steiner Brothers defeated Scott Hall/Syxx {Sean Waltman} due the leg injury of Kevin Nash" and the [2] WCW title history says "The Outsiders: Scott Hall and Kevin Nash defeat The Steiner Brothers: Rick and Scott 01/12/98 / The Steiner Brothers: Rick and Scott defeat The Outsiders: Scott Hall and Syxx* 10/13/97 Syxx (now wrestling as X-pac), subbing for injured Kevin Nash" Looks like WWE and WCW doesn't recogniced the reign and Waltman was a substitute. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 14:41, 11 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No, he didn't win the title, he was indeed just a substitution. It seems to me that, at the time, Syxx was considered one half of the tag team champions, albeit if only briefly. WWE (understandably) doesn't recognise this reign, so I think it works best by listing the reign on his page, but having a note afterwards saying that WWE doesn't acknowledge it. — Richard BB 14:45, 11 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Are you sure? A substitute isn't a champion always. WCW doesn't recognized as champion. For example, the TNA Tag team championship. One time, Alex Shelley was the substitute for Bobby Roode. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 16:38, 11 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
You might be right, actually. Sure, if you want to remove it, I won't oppose it. — Richard BB 22:54, 11 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Uff. Now, user:Vjmlhds show me a photo about freebird rules and appears Nash, Hall and Syxx. What's happend? Nor WWE or WCW recognized Waltman as champion. I'm thinking we are inventing the articles: hulk hogan's two extra wcw world heavyweight reings, tna world tag team champions (kaz/young, creed as champion) I think it's simple: no company recognized the reign, he wasn't champion. Also, OWOW canoeand Cagematch doesn't list him as champion--HHH Pedrigree (talk) 17:46, 20 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I think your best bet is to take it up with Vjmlhds; I don't mind either way how it's listed. I'll go with whatever the consensus of the sources say. — Richard BB 18:12, 20 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, but I want to hear your opinion about it. I think you are a great user. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 18:25, 20 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I don't mean to bother you, but regarding the Freebird Rule discussion, I was pointing out to HHH Pedigree a recent piece done by WWE about all the teams over the years who have used the gimmick. Among them was the Wolfpac. It looks like WWE gave Syxx credit for being a co-champion kind of after the fact the way the piece is written. At the end of the day, the WCW Tag Team Championship is WWE property, and if they want to say Syxx was "Freebirded" into the title, then their word is law, since it's their title. Vjmlhds (talk) 18:48, 20 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I'll weigh-in on the talk page. — Richard BB 19:52, 20 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Scarborough Fair (ballad) bands

Hi Richard BB, why you can't permit the addition of Cernunnos Band? Because is an Argentine Band? If you don't know about it is not enough for erase it. In the original article there are many bands that could be mention like not notable. Let me introduce the change or unedit yours. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hectorjc3 (talk • contribs) 16:53, 14 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'll reply on your talk page. — Richard BB 17:51, 14 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 13 November 2013

WWE

Hi. I have a question and you discusses about WWE name in the talk page. I know that World Wrestling Entertainment changed the name to WWE in 2011. So, it means that wrestlers work in WWE, not World Wrestling Entertainment, right? Are this editions right? [3] [4] [5] [6] I reverted them, because if a wrestler wins a title post april 2011, he will won the title in WWE, not World Wrestling Entertainment/WWE. It's like a 2010 wrestler won the title in World Wrestling Federation/Entertainment. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 01:08, 19 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There's conflicting reports about WWE's name. I think as far as technicalities go, their official trading name is still "World Wrestling Entertainment", even though WWE have stated that in the links you provided at Talk:WWE that they prefer to just be called "WWE". I suppose that you're right: post-April 2011, we should refer to it as "WWE" rather than "World Wrestling Entertainment/WWE". However, I don't think it's technically wrong to still call them the former. — Richard BB 07:22, 19 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 20 November 2013

The Shield

They worked in NXT it's a list of promotions or organizations they wrestled in as the shield which were NXT first and WWE after everyone knows that except you don't seem to understand that JMichael22 (talk) 14:12, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Chill out, buddy. Let's take it to the talk page. Also, why do you have a claim on your userpage that you're an admin? You're not one. — Richard BB 14:16, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It's simple NXT is different from the WWE and what Admin are you talking about? JMichael22 (talk) 14:20, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm talking about the userbox near the bottom of your page that says "This user is an administrator on the English Wikipedia.". — Richard BB 14:21, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I just saw it I don't even know what that is only things Iv placed in my user box have been my age and my city's and my teams why is that other thing there, The thing that says 6 months and 9 days? JMichael22 (talk) 14:26, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well, you added the admin box here. I hope you won't mind if it's removed. Anyway, hopefully we can resolve the original issue at Talk:The Shield (professional wrestling). — Richard BB 14:31, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I never realized it was there JMichael22 (talk) 14:51, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Big Show

Please not changing his name. His formal name is ""The Big Show"" and He called from ring announcer in wwe is ""The Big Show. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shinkazamaturi (talk • contribs) 15:08, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Official citations say otherwise, as does our consensus. — Richard BB 15:10, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No! His formal name is not "Big Show". His formal name is "The Big Show". because He called from ring announcer in wwe is it.

[7] which he first ever won wwe title. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shinkazamaturi (talk • contribs) 09:39, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
What the ring announcer says is irrelevant. If you look at the link I provided above, WWE says that his official name is just "Big Show". The ring announcer isn't exactly a reliable source. — Richard BB 09:44, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Richard, his official name is omit. Others match even called from ring announcer is it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shinkazamaturi (talk • contribs) 12:58, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I'm afraid I'm really not sure what you're trying to say. Look at it this way: the official citations on his WWE profile call him "Big Show". The card that pops up when he's on the way to the ring says "Big Show". Even the damn video games and magazines call him "Big Show". And yet, because the rig announcer happens to say "The Big Show", you think it should take precedence? Sorry, but Wikipedia works off reliable sources, and the reliable sources call him "Big Show". — Richard BB 13:02, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think it should take precedence. but I understand saying you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shinkazamaturi (talk • contribs) 13:16, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the Cleanup

Hey thanks for the cleanup. Thank you so much. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.251.48.215 (talk) 15:57, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No worries. — Richard BB 16:13, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 04 December 2013

Helmet

You are recent genre warrior attitude is against Wikipedia's policies. Please refrain from changing genres without any suitable references to support your claim. Not only does their music not have any noise rock and post hardcore characteristics but also most published articles about them refer to them as a groove band or alternative band. It is requested to stop your genre warrior like stubbornness and it is expected of you to comply with Wikipedia's policies.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Czello&oldid=584864620"