Talk:John Cena

Archives
Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3

Archive 3

Archive 3 is now up. I tried to just delete the non article related/off topic conversation that was clogging the page, but it was still pretty unwieldy. The only topics that were alive and current to the articles content (as far as I can see) were the one on the alleged Asperger's Syndrome and possibly the one about his former bodybuilding career.

Please don't use the talk page for discussion on Cenas talent or any ongoing angles/gimmicks with him or anyone else. The talk page is for discussion on the articles content only.-- bd (talk to me) (watch me) 05:37, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

'Five Moves of Doom'

As a fan of John Cena, I am against the hypocrisy of many of his critics for their 'Five Moves Of Doom' comments, especially since many of these people support Hogan, Boogeyman, and Batista, all of whom have not the same in-ring skill as Cena. However, it is absolutely absurd that the Five Moves are repeatedly removed by some mark-out fanboy who doesn't want anything negative said about Cena. The Five Moves are the basis of almost all criticism aimed at Cena, and therefore I have placed them back on the page, although obviously I have rephrased the wording so it is no longer biased against Cena and is entirely factual. Don't remove them again, as that is just stupid and goes against your whole 'no bias' attitude since you're biasing it in favour of Cena while also not letting people know the truth. Again, this is from a HUGE defender of Cena's skill. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SteveBrookstein (talk • contribs)

Numerous times before, the "Five Moves of Doom" (now known as the Victory Sequence?) have been wanted to be put up here on the wiki. But since it is not referenced and is nothing but a small smark fan term, it doesn't have a place in the article. Blacklist 04:22, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

I disagree I am also a huge Cena fan and I believe that the Six moves of doom belong on the page. You seem to have left out one part of the sequence. I have written a correct version below.

• Shoulder block
• Repeating Clotheslines
• Spin out Powerbomb
• 5 Knuckle Shuffle
• FU
• STFU

It's not a matter of agreeing or disagreeing. It's the Wikipedia rules. No sources means no go. Blacklist 21:41, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

There are six moves in the sequence not 5. You neglected to mention the clothesline(s). Just watch any John Cena match and you will see all 6 moves of doom. I am a huge Cena fan and this is why some people think that this shows that he has poor wrestling ability. However Hogan doesn't have as good of ability as a superstar such as Chris Beniot but Hogan and Cena are more strikers than technical wrestlers and I don't see why the fans hate him so much. WHEN WILL IT END!!!! User: Big Boss 0.

It will "end" when Cena's matches are varied and entertaining.

Be origional when thinking up a response.

Dear lord,who cares! I think we can see that Cena cannot wrestle. If it doesn't have a source, then remove it. I don't want to fuel this any further than it has to, people either like or hate him. Personally I hate him, ANYWAY....Regardless of my feelings to the "5 moves of doom", remove it if it must be removed.Rules are rules.--Frontiers Of Honour 20:26, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Images

Where has the picture of Cena winning the belt at Wrestlemania 21 gone to and I would like to ask the same about the picture of him with the his custom United States Championship. We also need a picture with his current Chain Gang Assult Batalion shirt because it deals with the release of his movie The Marine. Could someone please add them back. Thank you.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.69.137.8 (talk)

"Fair use" images have been deleted as they added nothing to the article. His having a new shirt to promote his movie isn't notable. «»bd^{I'm cool!}I'm cocky! _{I'm bad!} 06:16, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

I hugely disagree. Him staring in a movie is a huge thing for any person and there should be something to represent his new soldier gimmic. And could someone possibly add on a picture of Cena's Custom U.S and WWE titles. Thank you.

His movie is important, and is mentioned. The shift to a "soldier" gimmick is mentioned too, though it should be under 2006, where I shall add it. Having a shirt made, however, it is not important. Noting that would open a door to mention every time a wrestler has a new shirt made to go with a new gimmick or catch phrase. I don't know where the title belt pictures went, but I'll try to replace them in a second. «»bd(^talk _stalk) 01:03, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

I saw that you added the images of the titles. Thank you very much. These are very important due to the fact that he designed the spinner version of the U.S. Title and co-designed the spinner WWE Championship with Vince McMahon.

If Cena deisgned either, no wonder they Suck as titles. I believe that his movie should be mentioned, but this list of adding pictures because it relates to him is absurd. The Custom US and WWE titles will be on their respective pages.Surely?--Frontiers Of Honour 20:28, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Absurd, and illegal. -- THL 20:42, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

"Day of Reckoning 2" picture

The article states that the picture showing John Cena giving the FU to Kurt Angle is from the video game WWE: Day of Reckoning 2 but clearly it is not. Somebody, who is not a new member (the article is locked for newer members), should edit the text claiming the picture coming from the video game. 62.65.77.155 14:01, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Protected

I have protected this page! The vandalism on this page is unreal!! I hate Cena as much as the next person, and I think he is terrible in the ring, but this vandalism is just immature and very juvenile! Please no one take off the protection on this page. Thanks. --Fr3nZi3 16:38, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

I take some offense to you not liking Cena because even though he doesn't have much wrestling skill he knows how to fight. But I agree that the vandalism is out of control. I thank whoever cleans up Cena's artical.

Caws.ws thought it would be funny to gang up and vandalize the article. Thank god for locks. Blacklist 21:44, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

I agree. This is supposed to be an encyclopedia not a smear campaign. User:Big Boss 0

lol this article is funny. it keeps getting vandalized because of the fan's hatred against cena User:Jcdizon

Then the fans need to grow up. The wiki is not a toy. It's supposed to be an information tool. Blacklist 21:20, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

I agree that the people who hate Cena need to grow up! Cena may not have very much skill but he deserves respect of the fans. He is a 3 time WWE Champion and not for nothing.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.69.137.200 (talk)

You're right, it wasn't for nothing: it was for Vince to flog merchandise from his sorry corporate pawn ass.

The fans need to grow up to, they do their fair share of vandalism.«»bd(^talk _stalk) 22:51, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

He doesn't really deserve any respect. He's a horrible wrestler. By the way, the move list he has on his page is completely off. He doesn't do half of them anymore, or ever

Cena deserves a lot of respect! He is the WWE Champion. A 3 time WWE and U.S. Champion. He has held the WWE Championship for a total of more than 400 days of combined reigns. Triple H hasn't even come close to this. He must be doing something right. He is a great wrestler. He just doesn't have a large of a moveset as Chris Beniot. He is the next Hulk Hogan because neither of them had a lot of moves and relied mostly on striking to get the job done. If you hate Cena for his lack ofmoves then you obviously hate Hulk Hogan!

Why, yes, I...do...what's your point? Oh, that's right, you don't have one.

My point is that Hogan and Cena are great wrestlers not because they have a lot of moves, but they have a lot of charisma. If you have a dull character and a lot of moves the fans will boo you ( X-Pac). But if you have a dynamic character such as Hogan or Cena they are exciting to watch no matter what they do in the ring. Hogan could ("paint himself green"-Jimmy Hart) and the fans would still love him. The die hard Cena fans will love him for his past and future acomplishments! If you do not find this quote valid watch the Hulk Hogan Complete Anthology disc 3. Cena and Hogan are great wrestlers like Chris Beniot and Triple H. RVD and Kurt angle are a completely different story. They suck no matter where or how they wrestle!

That's your opinion, but seriously, it's time to end this discussion. This page isn't for a mark vs. smark debate; this is for ways to improve the article itself. There is no point in trying to convince people of your side because everyone who cares has already forged their opinions and closed their minds to the other side. Stop taking up room on this page and go do something useful, please. -- THL^CCD 06:18, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Take the personal attacks and the forum-esq discussion somewhere else. Blacklist 03:43, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

yeah,take a chill....everyone.i believe we need to instate a policy where if you start by editing that page you get blocked,like the bogdanov affair almost..waaay to much vandalism.this is right up there with george w bush...while i think hes an idiot,i also think its idiotic to vandalise his page.and,i admit it[gasp,as my sister is going to post when she reads this] i have lost some interest in cena.hes pretty good looking but...same thing every week.he really needs to go heel.but should i blank his page and replace it with 'cena needs to go heel'?no.vandals,please think about what you are doing:you are not hurting cena.you are hurting wikipedia,which is,as a whole,neutral to cena.--The Pink Panther 04:14, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

The anon tried to start this up again. Would anyone care if I just deleted this section? -- THLR^CCD 03:53, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Locks are one of the best things wikipedia has, the vandilism I've seen on pages are HORRIBLE! But i have an idea, what about only someone who vandilized is blocked, or is that possible? Cobra wwe 14:41, 17 December 2006

It is very possible, and what we try to do before protecting a page. There are so many anon vandals on this page that tons of people would have to be blocked, and anon blocks are very short, so they would be back in 2 days. The most efficient way of dealing with this level of vandalism is protection. Cheers, -- THL 19:19, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Five Moves Of Doom

I put down how people attack Cena for his Five moves of doom in hopes that there will be less vandalism, but took it back due to the fact it might be taken as vanalism.

Why bother? The "FMOD" aren't even supposed to be here. Blacklist 03:43, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

Oh, you removed it per above. Good. Blacklist 03:46, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

Once again I have to tell you that there are 6 moves in the sequence not 5.

Commenting on my edit.

I bolded "Fireman's Carry Powerslam" because thats the version of the FU he does currently. If you want to remove the bold, go ahead, I just thought it would be good to know... TJ Sparks 10:01pm, Nov. 24, 2006 (UTC)

Wooden Leg

I've heard John Cena has a 'wooden / artificial leg'... is this true? 41.243.32.211 11:03, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

No. -- THL^CCD 12:51, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

That isn't even remotely true. Cena's legs are exposed because of the attire that he wears. Whoever came up with that one must need an eye exam because they would have to be blind to believe that! User: Big Boss 0

OMG Hu ever thort of that dusnt no anything!! lol. User: Tash4johncena

How long is this block going to last?

It is not really working as I have seen some vandalism on here even when protected. Registered users who have been here a while can still edit. Even if only administrators can only edit this page, sadly people will just wait, be the best account they can be, ask for administration, then vandalize this page immediately afterwards. Maybe they will get tired of it due to the fact the vandals of this page come in groups. If it keeps getting vandalized to a point they will get bored since everyone is doing it and leave. But then again it might not work since this guy is so hated and if they were to get bored they would have a long time ago. So I guess I am just asking when this page is going to be unblocked so it can be updated more quickly since I always see stuff from a month ago being the end of it. — The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mr Five Moves Of Doom (talk • contribs) 17:42, 8 December 2006 (UTC).--Mr Five Moves Of Doom 17:44, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Sorry I forgot my sig but it looks like it got added anyway--Mr Five Moves Of Doom 17:44, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Go through the history and look at the page when the lock comes off. Every single time this page is hit incredibly hard and the lock has to come right back on. «»bd(^talk _stalk) 17:55, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

It just happened again. Good Lord people hate on this guy way too much. I don't even know if it is out of hate or they just want to have a page get vandalized so much that the administrators are going to have to think of something crazy to stop it.-- 209.244.43.209 21:33, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

This page should remian locked for a while because idiots keep vandalizing it. At least when it is locked it is harder to get vandalized.User: Big Boss 0

I suspect that User: Crazy Commander is a sockpuppet of User: You're The Man Now Dog.204.42.20.85 20:37, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

I am not sure if they are the same person. I checked the history but the attacks do seem similar. User: Big Boss 0

The page has now been unprotected per Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Bowser Koopa. --  Netsnipe  ►  03:44, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

As usual the vandals are at it again. Bowser Koopa was only part of the problem please do not unlock this page. It will be much harder to vandalize. Big Boss 0 03:06, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

It is already unblocked. -- THL 03:38, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Well someone blocked it again! Big Boss 0 17:31, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

It was unblocked, then vandalized 15+ times in the span of a day justifying locking it again. Don't look forward to it being unblocked for very long anytime soon because people are going to continue to be childish.«»bd(^talk _stalk) 18:12, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

OMG!!! Hu ever thort of that dusnt no anything!! LOL.

Military Career??

I recall an episode of some WWE show where Cena was still kind of new, and they showed him in a Marines uniform on the jumbotron - was that just Kayfabe, or was it real?

--Goatrider 03:51, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Anal sex

Look, there's been no consensus on this, not even any discussion on it. So can anyone explain why you think it's important to talk about a person's views on anal sex in the biography of a wrestler? Of what relevance to his wrestling career is it? Metros232 06:09, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

The discussion took place through edit summaries. In my opinion, no consensus was ever achieved seeing as only three people were involved. I was one of the people for including this in the article, seeing as the sex drive is important to a personality. Cheers, -- THL 06:13, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Looking through the history, I can't find it. Just know that over a period of maybe 6 total edits we reached a quiet understanding, but nothing that counts as a consensus in my view. I'm going to be taking a Wikibreak soon, and I don't really care about this to much, so whatever you and the others decide on will work for me. Cheers, -- THL 06:23, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

How is it not relevent? The section is "personal information" which translates to "personal life." How is his sex life not a part of his personal life?BooyakaDell 06:30, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

I see absolutely no discussion/consensus forming in the edit summaries regarding this. The most I see in terms of discussion is BooyakaDell (talk · contribs) adding it several times, it getting reverted several times, then BooyakaDell saying that it's "absolutely notable" then after it gets reverted again, runs around saying "but it's cited, but it's cited". On December 4th, Mikecraig (talk · contribs) added the comment about where it was relevant or not and it hasn't been answered yet.

So, then let's try to form a consensus now rather than running around claiming that one exists. I'll also post a note to WP:BLPN to see if we can get some outside views of this. A lot of the history of this article is just a mass of reverts and edit warring, so let's put a kabash to that before it starts and form consensus now.

It's my opinion that it is of no relevance to his wrestling. If sex drive relates to personality, shouldn't we then discuss sex lives in every biography if we can? If we find out that George W. Bush also has similar views on anal sex, where do we slot that in, between discussion of 9/11 and Iraq? Metros232 06:37, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

It is relevent to his personal life. I don't think that logic works here...If we find out that George W. Bush also likes Fist of the North Star, where do we slot that in, between discussion of 9/11 and Iraq? That can't be the standard.BooyakaDell 23:21, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Still waiting for response...BooyakaDell 13:33, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

BooyakaDell, you have absolutely no consensus to add this back, why did you do it anyway? Because I hadn't responded yet? Well, God forbid I was busy doing other things in real life and on Wikipedia. You have two editors who want to put it in, two who don't, and another at the discussion at WP:BLPN who also agrees it shouldn't be put in. You have no consensus to add it back yet, so please don't. Metros232 13:36, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Metro, please be civil (WP:CIVIL, assume good faith (WP:AGF), and do not accuse me or any other user of ignoring the discussion at a particular place (in this case, WP:BLPN) when there was no way for that user to know that such discussion was taking place. Thank you.BooyakaDell 13:39, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Just because something is verifiable doesn't mean it's encyclopedic. On its own the piece of info IMO is sufficiently non-encyclopedic that it should not be included unless the statement itself develops notoriety. That should be able to be established quite easily. If it was just a throw-away statement let it disappear, it's not encyclopedic. If buzz develops around it then add it. Anchoress 10:50, 16 December 2006 (UTC)