Jump to content

Talk:Dolph Ziggler

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Talk:Nick Nemeth)
Good articleDolph Ziggler has been listed as one of the Sports and recreation good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Good topic starDolph Ziggler is part of the Spirit Squad series, a good topic. This is identified as among the best series of articles produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do so.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
February 24, 2010Good article nomineeListed
April 27, 2010Good topic candidatePromoted
October 5, 2023Good article reassessmentKept
Current status: Good article

Requested move

[edit]
The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: No consensus, page not moved  Ronhjones  (Talk) 22:27, 10 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Nick Nemeth → Dolph Ziggler — Can we move this article to Dolph Zigger instead of his real name. Every wrestler's article uses the ring name instead of their real name. The Undertaker is under the article The Undertaker: So is Triple H. But this one isn't--Nascarking (talk) 19:52, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What other article are named is irrelevant. Articles should be titled by their common name (WP:COMMONNAME). Can you show/explain why you think "Dolph Ziggler" is the common name? ♥Nici♥Vampire♥Heart♥ 06:54, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Move does not seem to be supported by policy. Active Banana (talk) 15:56, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Because he has always used the name since coming back to the WWE in 2009. We all know him as Dolph Ziggler. Let me ask you, do you think people know The Undertaker as Mark Calloway or as just The Demon of Death Valley?!--Nascarking (talk) 16:00, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Did you read the policy about article names? Per: "In determining what this name is, we follow the usage of reliable sources, such as those used as references for the article." Show that the independant third party sources overwhelmingly use your preferred stage name and not the birth name. Active Banana (talk) 16:06, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
[1][2][3]--Nascarking (talk) 19:41, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
You provided 3 refs, out of the 77 in the article. Not a very good indication that reliable sources generally use the name you suggest. And 2 of your "sources" are wikipedia articles which are NOT reliable sources. Active Banana (talk) 20:46, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
You sound just like my friends at school and my teachers. If you read my user page, I have a user box reading I believe Wikipedia is a reliable site. Underneath the actual website, it's basically a bureaucracy. Because every edit is monitored by Millions of Admins, Reviewers (Which I Am), Auto Users, IP's, and BOT's. How could it not be a reliable source?!----Nascar king 20:09, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia articles aren't independent, third party sources either. And of course, he's listed as "Dolph Ziggler" in the WWE employees list – it's his current ring name. That doesn't help prove it's his most common name. ♥Nici♥Vampire♥Heart♥ 02:12, 7 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This gets no from me he's only been Dolph for little over an year it would be a different story if it was ten year's.--Steam Iron 00:12, 31 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

So I guess I'll wait 5 or 10 years before I do this again?----Nascar king 20:02, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Although given the industry he works in, it will probably be three or four different names between now and then! Active Banana (talk) 20:10, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

ref list

[edit]
  1. ^ http://www.wwe.com/superstars/smackdown/dolphziggler/
  2. ^ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triple_H
  3. ^ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_World_Wrestling_Entertainment_employees
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Dolph uses the rko Matt3535 (talk) 23:25, 26 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

New Picture

[edit]

can someone get an updated photo of nick and if i can i will try to get a photo of him when smackdown comes to australia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dolphzigglerrules (talk • contribs) 15:50, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

IC Champion?

[edit]
  • Perhaps we shouldn't list Ziggler as Intercontinental Champion until the episode he is supposedly booked to win happens? Plus we don't know if he's meant to win or not. I'd suggest removing information about his supposed IC title reign unless it actually occurs. --Evil Yugi (talk) 05:16, 2 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It has occurred. The episode in question has been taped, it just hasn't aired. Not having aired is not the same thing as not having happened. ♥Nici♥Vampire♥Heart♥ 07:47, 2 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I see. My bad. --Evil Yugi (talk) 21:06, 7 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relationship???

[edit]

I heard Nemeth and WWE Diva Nikki Bella are going out and does anyone think we should add it to the page??? —Preceding unsigned comment added by User:dolphzigglerrules (talk) 01:30, 19 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Not unless you can find a reliable source to verify the claim. And even then dating someone is often just trivia. People date a lot of people. Active Banana ( bananaphone 01:39, 19 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have checked many websites and photos and they all say they are dating —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dolphzigglerrules (talk • contribs) 05:31, 19 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

National Championships

[edit]

The portion about his amateur career is a bit incorrect. Kent State has never won a Division I national wrestling championship. While Nemeth was at St. Edwards, the high school team won two national championships, but not Kent State. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.231.203.23 (talk) 04:41, 30 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Requested move, December 2010

[edit]
The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Move. Jafeluv (talk) 10:22, 11 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nick Nemeth → Dolph Ziggler — These are their proper names per WP:COMMONNAME as all of these men have had prominence and exposure with their ringnames while neither of these men are hardly recognizable by their real names. All the target pages redirect to them so it will be a fairly easy move. Feedback ☎ 20:30, 3 December 2010 (UTC) Feedback ☎ 20:30, 3 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment if Stu Bennett is moved could someone please place a hat link to the Soccer Player named Wade Barret. There is not one currently since Wade Barret is currently a dab page and no one typing Stu Bennett would be looking for the soccer player.--76.66.180.54 (talk) 02:46, 8 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Return to Raw (2011- Present)

[edit]

On the March 7 edition of Raw, Dolph Ziggler was rehired and signed to Raw. And defeated John Morrison. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tbone819 (talk • contribs) 04:02, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I created a new section "Move to Raw" for Ziggler because Ziggler's move to Raw has ended his storyline feud with Edge over the World Heavyweight Championship. The previous section was "World Heavyweight Champion" and thus was inappropriate for his current stint on Raw. Ziggler has also had new feuds with John Morrison and Snooki, and a new look, so I reflected that in that section. Starship.paint (talk) 12:02, 17 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Zig Zag

[edit]

Previously Ziggler had both the Jumping Russian Legsweep and the Zig Zag (Reverse bulldog) listed as two of his finishers. Upon watching the video for the match where Ziggler supposedly used the Jumping Russian Legsweep, I realised that it was really a Zig Zag, the two descriptions were of the exact same move so I have removed the finisher of jumping russian legsweep. Starship.paint (talk) 12:05, 17 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

So you removed information that was referenced to a reliable source, based on your own opinion? No, not happening. I've restored it. Please don't do that again. NiciVampireHeart 14:37, 17 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I removed info from a reliable source. But clearly, one of the reliable sources is WRONG. I watched the videos, the Reverse Bulldog and the Jumping Russian Legsweep both refer to the Zig-Zag, do you understand what I am saying to you right now? They refer to the same move so clearly, one of the descriptions is wrong and has to be removed, as two descriptions for one move is redundant! One of your reliable sources is wrong. Did you not read my message? Don't be so stubborn and intent on following the rules please, because this newbie finds it extremely frustrating. Not to mention you removed my edits to Ziggler's current time inRaw which I referenced with RELIABLE sources. It is your job, as the reverter, to make sure you don't remove any good edits I made no matter if I made any bad edits. To just remove ALL of my edits without checking whether they are bad or good just because you thought one of them was bad just makes me feel that my contributions to this site are unvalued. I advise you to revise your conduct to be a little more flexible. I notice you revert a lot of other people's edits. Perhaps they were unsourced, but maybe you could put in some efforts to search for the sources yourself so that you don't waste people's time and good intentions by simply reverting edits. Starship.paint (talk) 23:20, 17 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I checked all of your edits. Then I reverted. Just because you source something doesn't mean it's notable enough to be included. What exactly did WM add to his overall career? And why do you feel that every new paragraph needs a new subsection – because, hint, hint, it really doesn't. By the way, as a heads up, you'll probably be already to tell this from your talk page, but if you don't stop removing sourced infotmation because in your opinion it's wrong, you will find yourself on the wrong end of a vacation from wikipedia. NiciVampireHeart 15:52, 19 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

1. In my opinion, any Wrestlemania appearance deserves mention, purely because said wrestler is making an appearance on the Biggest Stage of Them All, it is an landmark achievement to be wrestling on Wrestlemania. 2. I have no idea what you are saying about every paragraph needing a new subsection. I don't feel that way. 3. You didn't see that I made (or didn't explain why you saw fit to remove) other edits to shift all mentions of Ziggler defending the IC title and losing it to the above paragraph because it was about Ziggler being the IC Champion. Those mentions should not be in the WHC section. Starship.paint (talk) 08:00, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Photo of Ziggler as World Heavyweight Champion

[edit]

I found a photo of Ziggler as World Heavyweight Champion that I would like to add. http://prorasslin.files.wordpress.com/2011/02/ziggler-champ.jpg?w=270&h=378 However I am a new user and I don't know about copyright policy. Does this photo have copyright? How can I know? Starship.paint (talk) 12:17, 17 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

General rule of thumb: every image on the internet is copyrighted, unless it explicitly says otherwise. In order to upload a random file from the internet to wikipedia, you will need to provide a link proving that it is not copyrighted. NiciVampireHeart 14:35, 17 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

OK Thank you. Starship.paint (talk) 11:31, 19 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of Jumping Russian Legsweep from Ziggler's Finishing Moves, as it is the same move as the Zig Zag (Reverse Bulldog), but JRL is a worse description

[edit]

Look at Ziggler's finishing moves. It lists: 1. Jumping Russian Legsweep 2. Zig Zag (Reverse Bulldog)

Jumping Russian Legsweep's reference, wrestleview, which is considered "a reliable source" is "http://www.wrestleview.com/news2009/1247952511.php" which is a broken link. The real link should be "http://www.wrestleview.com/viewnews.php?id=1247952511" It refers to the results of the 7/17/09 show, where Ziggler, with Jericho faced Jeff Hardy and Rey Mysterio. I found the match at "http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a1UG1XQGARQ" At 4:19 to 4:29 in the video, Ziggler performs the Jumping Russian Legsweep, which is the Zig Zag, really.

Reverse Bulldog's refernce, PW Torch, is also considered a reliable source. The link is to "http://www.pwtorch.com/artman2/publish/TV_Reports_9/article_35422.shtml" Jericho faced Finlay. I found the match at " removed YouTube link which violates WP:LINKVIO. NiciVampireHeart 16:43, 19 May 2011 (UTC) " Ziggler performs the Reverse Bulldog at 44:00-44:10. If you watch the videos, (take my word for it though), they are EXACTLY THE SAME MOVE, which Ziggler calls the Zig Zag.[reply]

So, one of these reliable sources is wrong, as the Zig Zag cannot be both a jumping russian legsweep and a reverse bulldog. One move should not have two different descriptions. People are human and make mistakes. Sometimes even authors of reliable websites may call a move wrongly. I believe the Wrestleview source, "reliable" as it may be, is wrong.

The Zig Zag was called as a Jumping russian LEGSWEEP. From wikipedia itself, it involves then while hooking the opponent's leg the wrestler falls backward, pulling the opponent to the mat back-first. If you watch the two videos of Ziggler above, you notice Ziggler never touches the opponent's leg. Thus, he can't be performing a Jumping Legsweep.'

Whereas, from wikipedia the Reverse Bulldog is Standing next to an opponent, the attacking wrestler grabs the side of the opponent's head and leaps backwards, resulting in both individuals landing supine Definitely more appropriate for the Zig Zag if you watch the videos.

Thus, due to this, I deem the Jumping Russian Legsweep, which describes the Zig-Zag, irrelevant as the Reverse Bulldog is more appropriate. I will be removing the Jumping Russian Legsweep from Ziggler's finishing moves, despite the "reliable" source. I ask that if you wish to revert my edit, that you read through this post again and watch the videos to convince yourself, because ONE of the RELIABLE sources is clearly wrong. Starship.paint (talk) 12:14, 19 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I apologise for editing your comment above, but please read and WP:LINKVIO and refrain from linking to known copyright violations, i.e. youtube videos whose uploaders obviously do not own the rights to the footage they uploaded.
All the bolding and ALLCAPS above does not detract from the point that this is based on your own opinion. The reliable sources state different – we use the sources, not your opinons. NiciVampireHeart 16:41, 19 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I want to make this very clear to you. Please read carefully. I want you to answer all my questions. They are simple Yes/No questions.

1. Should a single move (Zig-Zag) should have two technical descriptions, such as a) Jumping Russian Legsweep and b) Reverse Bulldog?
2. Do you agree that both the Jumping Russian Legsweep and Reverse Bulldog are the technical descriptions of the move Zig-Zag? (you'll need to consult video evidence)
3. Doesn't the existence of two technical descriptions for a single move contradict each other, despite both technical descriptions coming from "reliable" sources?
4. Since one of the descriptions is wrong, should we remove one of them so only one description remains?

Starship.paint (talk) 08:08, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well, sure, I'll play along. I've done you one better than your "simple Yes/No questions" (again, and like your comments on my talk page, very patronising, not to mention stifling discussion by insisting I respond to four questions in a total of four words), and provided reasons why I gave a "simple Yes/No" answer. Let me know if you feel this is to complex for the scope or remit of this discussion.
  1. No. Reason: Only the Reverse bulldog is sourced as being the Zig-Zag.
  2. No. Reason: The move 'Jumping Russian Legsweep' is not called the 'Zig-Zag' in the source.
  3. No. Reason: There is no "two technical descriptions for a single move". Source 1 [1] – quote: "Ziggler then hits his finisher, a Jumping Russian Leg Sweep". Lookie, no mention of the Zig-Zag. Source 2: [2] quote: "Ziggler then nailed his Zig-Zag reverse bulldog". So the Zig-Zag is a reverse bulldog. Hey – that's what the article says now, and what it said before you started this section. Ergo based on the sources, and try to follow here, the Jumping Russian Legsweep is a complete, different, and distinct finisher to the Zig-Zag.
  4. No. Reason: See above reasons, but I'll summarise here to <quoting you>make this very clear to you</quoting you>: The Jumping Russian Legsweep is not called the Zig-Zag, only the reverse bulldog is.
Thanks for the interrogation.
Have a nice day.
NiciVampireHeart 14:16, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I meant not to be patronising at all. I have no problem with you providing your reasons, rather than a simple Yes/No. Please, stop assuming that I am adopting a patronising attitude. Now, I'm not sure if my early comments I came off as patronising, but rest assured all my recent comments from posting on your wall onwards have been in good faith.

Now, all your answers are No, whereas all my answers are Yes. So the key difference between us, is that you do not think that the Jumping Russian Legsweep is a Zig-Zag. As I said, if you watch the videos, Ziggler did the exact same move both times. I believe at that time, Ziggler hadn't named his finisher yet, but he didn't change it. I found that reference 51 Smackdown: re-writing a good showhttp://slam.canoe.ca/Slam/Wrestling/2009/05/16/9476311.html also describes Ziggler performing a reverse bulldog. That was in May 2009. The Wrestleview reference is in July 2009. Ziggler was not reported to change his finisher at that time. As of now, I have only video evidence that he executed the same move. I'm not sure why you can't conclude from the video evidence that what Ziggler did was exactly the same? Starship.paint (talk) 15:53, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've been trying to get this change established for a long time now. There has never been a single source that contradicts these claims and states these are different moves, while footage of the matches and unestablished sources clearly suggest they're the same move. Because there is no reliable source that has ever stated these are different moves, so I don't see why editors here won't have an open dialogue and just revert edits they don't agree with. While there is no reliable source that has gone out and listed every possible description for the Zig Zag, there is no reliable citation that warrants listing all of these different moves. I think it would greatly benefit the article if editors looked at the footage and used their own reasoning. This strict refusal to use our own brains is detrimental to the article when Wikipedia acknowledges we can bend the rules if it will help the article. -WikiFew (talk) 04:41, 31 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

United States And Intercontinental Champion Position

[edit]

Jim Ross always mention what position the wrestlers were after they won their secondtier championship like Shelton was the 23rd to win both championships so what is Dolph's position? AnthonyTheGamer (talk) 22:12, 20 June 2011 (UTC) AnthonyTheGamer[reply]

I don't think that's important enough to be included, actually. Does it matter whether he's 22nd or 25th? Starship.paint (talk) 00:55, 22 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Gray Maynard and Andy Hrovat

[edit]

Should the article mention that Gray Maynard and Andy Hrovat were on his high school wrestling team and that they were all part of the same graduating class? It is impressive that Nemeth holds a school record for most pins when he was teammates with Maynard, who would become very successful in the UFC, and with Hrovat who competed in the Olympics. Grammarian10 (talk) 01:55, 21 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I am okay with this mention. Something along the lines of "Nemeth was teammates with GM and AH, who would go on to compete in the UFC and at the Olympics respectively". I suppose do you have a source to back you up? Starship.paint (talk) 00:55, 22 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Entrance theme history

[edit]

My edit concerning his entrance theme section was reverted because it lacked sources. This would have been fine except any source I could have found would have been youtube videos of the dates in question, videos that would have been against the rules to use as sources since they were copyright violations. On top of that, the sources for the themes deemed acceptable are simply links to where you can buy them online. So is this information that is just not allowed to exist on the page because the sources wouldn't be allowed, regardless of how accurate they were?

Max Nardi (talk) 05:03, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Signature move name

[edit]

Ziggler's been playing with the move name for awhile on Twitter and it looks like they've decided (via Scott Stanford on last week's Superstars) to start calling his Rocker Dropper (leg drop bulldog) the "Name Dropper." I haven't edited in a long long time, but I provided a reliable source since I know the episode in question on Youtube doesn't count. If the change was made too soon, I understand. :P --Miikro (talk) 08:52, 12 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Should he really be listed as a Triple Crown Champion?

[edit]

Sure, Nick Nemeth has been World, IC and Tag Champion, but WWE does not recognize Dolph Ziggler and Nicky Spirit Squad as the same wrestler [3]. Since the Triple Crown is a kayfabe recognition introduced by WWE, Ziggler should not be listed as one, since he has never been a Tag Team Champion as per WWE storylines (also in WWE link given). I'm not suggesting that any titles be removed from his accomplishments, but the Triple Crown accolade should. Mr Neese (talk) 16:17, 30 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Rather than delete this detail, I have instead noted that it is unrecognized by WWE. Mr Neese (talk) 16:29, 30 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dolph suckes Matt3535 (talk) 23:25, 26 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comedienne Amy Schumer

[edit]

Amy Schumer went on the Howard Stern show and talked a lot about her relationship with Dolph Ziggler.

I heard it myself live and here are several reliable sources:

http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/376444/20120822/amy-schumer-dolph-ziggler-wwe-sex-athlete.htm

http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/376444/20120822/amy-schumer-dolph-ziggler-wwe-sex-athlete.htm

http://www.howardstern.com/rundown.hs?d=1345780800

Kire1975 (talk) 02:03, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

PWI 500 & Nick Metro

[edit]

Hello, Actually Dolph Ziggler was ranked 6th in 2011 and not 2012 from what i saw on the Pro Wrestling Illustrated Wikipedia page, Can it be verified and corrected ? And for the name Nick Metro Could it be verified as well and it's not some mistaken edit, Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.50.221.142 (talk) 06:02, 10 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The name Nick Metro is false, He was never ever called by that name or used it during his whole career, Internet Wrestling Database and the WWE Profile itself is proof by itself that the name Nick Metro is false and not associated with Dolph Ziggler or even used. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LaRoux4Life (talk • contribs) 13:26, 4 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Request

[edit]

To update or at least upload Ziggler holding the World Title Hitmonchan (talk) 21:13, 15 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

PWI 500

[edit]

PWI ranked him #6 of the top 500 singles wrestlers in the PWI 500 in 2012 That information is WRONG !!! He was ranked 16th and not 6th ! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.50.221.142 (talk) 18:20, 3 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

PWI 500

[edit]

As i said before, He was ranked 16th and not 6th in the PWI 500 2012, And here's the PWI 500 for 2012 http://www.pwmania.com/complete-pro-wrestling-illustrated-top-500-wrestlers-list-for-2012#.UYTrMuSQZVY

With the massive number of popups that arise when I click that link (I don't recommend anyone follow it), I'd have trouble considering it to be a reliable source. Before trying to use that as a valid source, I would discuss it at the reliable source noticeboard. If their determination is that it is valid, then you can use the edit-semiprotected template (✉→BWilkins←✎) 12:20, 4 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Another source, http://www.profightdb.com/pwi-500/2012.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by LaRoux4Life (talk • contribs) 13:18, 4 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

And the PWI 500 mistake is still the same with no one correcting it, Really pathetic and idiotic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LaRoux4Life (talk • contribs) 12:09, 10 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Entrance Themes section has 2 missing themes!

[edit]

It is missing the Spirit Squad theme song, which he used as “Nicky”, as well as his first theme as Dolph Ziggler, called “Time To Shout”. Fix this. 216.157.195.66 (talk) 21:40, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nikki Bella

[edit]

"Nemeth was previously in relationships with former WWE Diva Nikki Bella..."

Nikki Bella is again an employee of WWE so 'former' should be removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.240.44.36 (talk) 01:07, 15 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

 Done STATic message me! 01:44, 15 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

love him — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:2459:9120:C926:B13:A589:BC43 (talk) 17:20, 15 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Colonel Sanders

[edit]

OK. That whole Kentucky Fried Chicken thing with The Miz was just a joke segment, but should it be added as a ring name?PeterMan844 (talk) 14:17, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 10 external links on Dolph Ziggler. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:05, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Dolph Ziggler. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:15, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 11 external links on Dolph Ziggler. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:32, 12 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 14 external links on Dolph Ziggler. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:29, 12 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Dolph Ziggler. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:15, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Amy Schumer

[edit]

Ziggler dating Amy is far more relevant to "personal life" than what his brothers did in their life which has nothing to do with Ziggler just because they are blood relatives. Also the Ziggler-Amy relation is valid, confirmed and well publicized. So I "re-added" it back. Dilbaggg (talk) 08:01, 14 November 2019 (UTC)Dilbaggg (talk) 07:28, 14 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

He is 42 years old now

[edit]

He turned 42 years old on 27th of july but the age is still marked as 41 on his page. Thank you. 176.72.98.185 (talk) 08:31, 28 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

GA Reassessment

[edit]

Dolph Ziggler

[edit]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch article reassessment page • Most recent review
Result: Kept. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 18:18, 5 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Uncited sections and use of unreliable sources like onlineworldofwrestling and Wrestle Zone. Z1720 (talk) 00:34, 27 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Requested move 26 February 2024

[edit]
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. – robertsky (talk) 15:05, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dolph Ziggler → Nic Nemeth – Dolph Ziggler is a trademark in WWE. Mr Nemeth has now left permanently and reverted to his real name, which he is using in 2 major wrestling companies. Telfordbuck (talk) 14:07, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose As many other wrestlers, he had worked for 15 years as Dolph Ziggler. He has worked on the biggest promotion in the world, he is a two time World Champion. he has worked on TV, Films and webseries as Dolph Ziggler. Goggle has 4.200.000 results for Ziggler, just 1.490.000 for Nemeth. Just a few months using his real name, I think Ziggler stills the WP:COMMONNAME. Maybe in one year... but now, It's too soon for a move. Also, I know the story, if he changes the name or return to Ziggler, will be another request to hcange the name, saying that Nic Nemeth is not the WP:COMMONNAME because he isn't working under his real name. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 14:22, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose move absent evidence of COMMONNAME. His time in WWE overshadows the rest of his career for now. O.N.R. (talk) 16:50, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. No proof supports WP:COMMONNAME as his time as Dolph Ziggler overshadows his time in other companies. Also a case of WP:TOOSOON per the same reason. Hansen SebastianTalk 17:34, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Nic Nemeth

[edit]

Although he worked 15 years as Dolph Ziggler, he's lived 43 as Nicholas Nemeth. I wasn't even able to find Goggle, let alone 4.200.000 results for Ziggler. How does this not use the same logic as Sasha Banks -> Mercedes Mone? You all are being awfully ridiculous. 50.32.184.37 (talk) 07:30, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Dolph_Ziggler&oldid=1234216762"