|This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the WWE article.|
|Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7|
|WWE was a good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There are suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.|
|Current status: Former good article nominee|
|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
Semi-protected edit request on 7 July 2015
|This edit request has been answered. Set the
- Not done: He's already wikilinked earlier in the infobox, under Founder. No need to link it twice. ‑‑ElHef (Meep?) 23:19, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
|This edit request has been answered. Set the
The latest section introduced; "Contracts" should be removed as it is not sourced. I request that this section be removed, or that a citation needed tag be added to it. 18.104.22.168 (talk) 22:51, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
- Done I've added a tag that it needs to be sourced. TrueCRaysball | #RaysUp 23:00, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
Semi-protected edit request on 20 August 2015
|This edit request has been answered. Set the
Please change "| founder = Vince McMahon Linda McMahon" to "| founder = Jess McMahon Toots Mondt", seeing as how the Capitol Wrestling Corporation is listed as WWE's predecessor & Jess & Toots founded the CWC. 22.214.171.124 (talk) 13:43, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
- Deny request please. The information is correct. Vince took over the original company. The current company and the CWC are not the same corporation. The CWC as it was no longer exists and hasn't done since the takeover. 126.96.36.199 (talk) 02:03, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
Madison Square Garden records
This page should mention the WWWF's run in MGS more thoroughly. In particular the several times that the promotion broke the attendance records in the arena, beginning with the Rocca/Pérez team to the reign of Pedro Morales... Despite being mentioned, Samartino is only mentioned superficially. At the very least, it should mention the Morales/Sammartino draw, which was considered a mega event for its time. IMO, by beginning to emphasize the promotion's history during the 80s it is disregarding the history of the time when it really became established after breaking away from the NWA. 188.8.131.52 (talk) 09:08, 22 August 2015 (UTC)
- No. What you are talking about predates this company, formed in 1980 as stated in the article and confirmed above. Your suggested content belongs here. 184.108.40.206 (talk) 23:35, 22 August 2015 (UTC)
- Well, no, not really. There's a distinction that needs to be made between the parent company, which changed in the early 80s when Vince the younger took over from his father and itself has since changed names, and the promotion, which is a continuous entity and collection of intellectual properties, previously owned by CWC, later owned by Titan Sports/WWFE inc/WWE inc. This article is not just about the corporation, but also the promotion. In fact, it is about the promotion firstly, and the corporation secondly. And it should cover the entire history of the promotion sufficiently. While I really have a hard time considering coverage that begins with 30-year-old events as RECENTISM, the article is lacking in earlier history, essentially glancing at everything from before the national expansion. oknazevad (talk) 00:46, 23 August 2015 (UTC)
World Wrestling Entertainment
Once again, (I know a few people dont care) but the WWE has been constantly referring to itself as the World Wrestling Entertainment lately
From Paul Heyman bringing it up, HHH etc.
During this years SummerSlam event the name "World Wrestling Entertainment Inc" was used. And during the past RAW events, the trademark in the bottom right current reads "WW Entertainment Inc", with the WW of course standing for "World Wrestling"
Can we please change the name of this page back to "World Wrestling Entertainement" and let this name be used in articles.
having it be "World Wrestling Entertiainment/WWE" Doesnt make any sense.
More Importantly the official website http://www.wwe.com/ reads
- "All WWE programming, talent names, images, likenesses, slogans, wrestling moves, trademarks, logos and copyrights are the exclusive property of World Wrestling Entertainment, Inc. and its subsidiaries (“WWE”). All other trademarks, logos and copyrights are the property of their respective owners. © 2015 WWE All Rights Reserved. This website is based in the United States. By submitting personal information to this website you consent to your information being maintained in the U.S., subject to applicable U.S. laws. U.S. law may be different than the law of your home country. WrestleMania logo TM & © 2015 WWE. All Rights Reserved."
This is all the proof you need. Not an old source from 2011 BlackDragon 17:58, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
I also bring
- The company's legal name never stopped being "World Wrestling Entertainment Inc", they've just been doing business as "WWE". Nothing in the links you've provided show otherwise.LM2000 (talk) 22:09, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
-_- Your doing this again......
If their name is "world wrestling entertainment" and you acknowledge this, why do you keep denying it?
The PROMOTION is also still World Wrestling Entertainment.
The sources I provided DO say that. Even if they do business as WWE, that changes nothing.
And the quote from the official website says "World Wrestling Entertainment, Inc. and its subsidiaries (“WWE”)"
Please stop this. You are wrong. You dont own the WWE pages. BlackDragon 22:14, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
- We reflect what reliable sources report. Here's what the Los Angeles Times said in this article:"Vince McMahon is taking the wrestling out of World Wrestling Entertainment Inc. No, this isn't an outrageous plot the colorful impresario has cooked up for his wrestlers to act out in front of thousands of screaming fans. McMahon, the chairman and chief executive of WWE, wants to give the company a makeover, starting with the name. From now on WWE will no longer stand for World Wrestling Entertainment. It will just be WWE, plain and simple." Emphasis mine. If WWE were to change back to being called "World Wrestling Entertainment" (notice the lack of Inc), we would still have to reflect that they did rebrand in 2011, although none of the sources you have provided reflect this. You've been blocked repeatedly for edit warring over this issue and we've tried to explain this to you a hundred different ways, at some point you should count your losses and move on before you face further blocks.LM2000 (talk) 22:27, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
Once again, that is a link from 2011!
On their shows and on the website they were going by WWE inc.
But recently, the website, the logos on the shows, etc have not being using WWE Inc anymore. They have been using the full name.
And I believe the OFFICIAL website trumps all sources when it comes to reliability. By going back to the old source, you are basically saying they cannot change their mind. They will forever be only WWE inc.
Again, in 1990, the COMPANY was known as Titan Sports Inc. however the PROMOTION was World Wrestling Federation
Now, maybe it WAS WWE Inc legally, but the promotion never changed its name.
NOW the WWE has been going by World Wrestling Entertainment Inc once again, and the promotion never changed its name
You dont need to be rude. You keep ignoring my points and sources because you dont want to be wrong or something. You dont own these pages.
The correct term needs to be used.
Question???? Do you even watch the product? Or are a fan of the World Wrestling Entertainment? BlackDragon 22:36, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
- Black Dragon, please review WP:CIVIL before posting again, and your opinion (and this is what you are presenting) is not relevant to the article or any other article on Wikipedia. You MUST cite a proper reliable source (see WP:RS for instructions) and until you do, the 2011 source stands as it has not been properly trumped. The WWE website is not reliable in this regard because it carries the usual false information of a wrestling promotion. The sourcing must be third party and independent. In other words, you have failed to prove conclusively through a reliable independent source that what you say is true. Your word is not good enough. Do you understand? 220.127.116.11 (talk) 09:53, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
- 1. the OFFICIAL website is wrong??? Alright then.
2. If WWE cant have a say on their own name then this site is crap. 3. I provided MANY, MANY third party sources that also back up the WWE's claim??? from this year. Not 5 years ago
I had no clue the WWE isnt a reliable source for the WWE. Silly me -_-
This isnt my opinion. Its a fact. And that source from 2011 links to a non existent page. So that source is not valid
Also a guy that has had an account for ONE day, doesnt really know the ins and outs of what can and cant happen. Just sayin BlackDragon 16:12, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
- You just admirably demonstrated that you don't understand, particularly the issue of sourcing and the difference between fact and opinion. You have presented your translation of the sources you are using. This is not fact and it never will be. If you are unable to accept this then it's quite clear you are not here to contribute. 18.104.22.168 (talk) 01:43, 1 September 2015 (UTC)